Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 20 May 2003

Vol. 1 No. 11

Bus Éireann and Bus Átha Cliath: Presentation.

I am delighted to welcome Mr. Bill Lilley, managing director, and Mr. Martin Nolan and Mr. Tim Hayes of Bus Éireann and Dr. Alan Westwell, managing director, Mr. Paddy Doherty, business development manager, and Mr. Shane Doyle, chief engineer, of Bus Átha Cliath.

I remind everybody that mobile phones should be switched off. Members of this committee have absolute privilege but this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. I wish to remind members of a long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that Members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I call on Dr. Westwell to start the presentation.

Dr. Alan Westwell

Chairman, on behalf of Bus Átha Cliath, I thank you for the invitation to attend the Joint Committee on Transport and to discuss the developments within Bus Átha Cliath. Members of the Bus Átha Cliath team are with me today. I propose to refer and summarise key features which are contained in my written presentation which has been circulated. Bus Átha Cliath has over 1,000 vehicles and 3,000 employees employed across seven depots, including drivers, traffic supervisors, engineering skilled craftsmen, operatives and clerical staff. School transport, previously carried out directly by Bus ÁthaCliath, is now subcontracted to a range of private operators. Within the engineering activity there are also participants from the private sector.

The staff embraced change and this has brought about a dramatic improvement in the quality and performance of services delivered to the customer. This change has enabled new systems and new procedures to be adopted and new technology to be introduced. Without taking those changes on board we could not have achieved what we have. An example of this was when we rose to the challenge three years ago when the transportation policy and plan required Dublin Bus to expand its peak fleet by 30%. This involved recruitment, reorganisation of services and how we deployed these in response to customer survey work. On efficiency levels the committee will note that we now have in the order of three employees per bus from the previous level of 4.7, bringing us in line with the best bus industry standards.

We have been at the leading edge and forefront in terms of an equality review. We now have 190 employees from 45 countries outside Ireland and other companies have been following and learning from our experience. Combining all of these things, the strengths and achievements of Bus Átha Cliath, delivered through the employees who have the experience, knowledge and expertise, we now compare well to other similar sized cities of operation on benchmarking.

We have made quality bus corridors work. The civil engineers and the county councils and the city provide the road space and do the design work, but thereafter, day by day, we have an operational plan to deploy resources and respond to the customer. We believe, on the basis of customer research and the results to date, the team involvement of everyone, including the Garda and the local authorities, that it has been very successful. We took the initiative in launching the nine QBCs with household drops, media meetings, advertising, bus shelter advertising and ongoing promotion. The customer research shows that, within reason, the customer wants a consistent journey time every day. The customer does not want the journey to take 40 minutes one day and 20 minutes another day. We have examples of how we can achieve that.

One of the newspaper headlines for Bus Átha Cliath was: "Peak service frequency has been vastly improved." For example, there is a bus every minute on the Stillorgan and Blanchardstown QBCs and every two minutes on the Malahide, Lucan, Rathfarnham and Swords QBCs. We have recorded a 38% increase at peak time of customers carried on the QBC schemes. Research also shows that quite a high percentage of new users possess a car but choose to travel by bus.

However, traffic congestion has a major impact on bus services: 80% of the route network still does not operate over quality bus corridor roads. We engaged some external professionals to assess this for us with the information we provided and it showed that our average scheduled speed at peak periods was 14.6 kph. In gridlock conditions it can be much lower, as we know. This compares to an international city average scheduled speed of 19.6 kph. It shows there is scope to improve the speeds by 33%. With all the benchmarking we have done, Dublin appears to come at the lower end of the scale regarding speed per hour. The target speed on quality bus corridors is 22 kph. A couple of buses achieve that while others are in the high teens, but this shows the potential for further work in this area.

The following categories of bus priority have been identified, where further bus priority would greatly improve this area of gridlock for buses: upgrade existing QBCs and introduce intelligent electronic systems; reduce the journey time across the city, for a bus to travel just a few kilometres, and connect the QBCs from the radials; introduce new radial QBCs and new orbital QBCs; and extend existing QBCs. The strength of the QBC concept can be seen when we look at four buses in a corridor carrying approximately 90 people per bus, a total of 360 travellers, whereas 30 cars in a similar road space would carry 1.4 people each on average. From the point of view of utilisation of road space as part of the transportation policy, we believe the QBC element has been very successful and has great potential.

For the future there is greater potential capacity, with a further bus depot coming on stream which was part of the national development plan. This process started a few years ago. We will be signing the contract shortly. That will be in the Fingal area, where it was indicated that the greatest population increase would occur. From a mobility plan viewpoint, one solution to ease gridlock would appear to be more bus priority, as we have outlined. Recently that has been advocated in the media. We therefore support that.

The super low floor, fully accessible buses have dramatically changed the fleet. Up to the end of the 1990s we had the old bus fleet and the experience of riding in one of those vehicles compared to what we now have is significant. This has been shown in the response from the customers concerned and those people who own a car. In recent years we have had 275 extra vehicles and additional capacity in the system. We also purchased 400 new replacement buses during recent years. In 2000 Dublin Bus declared that every new bus from that year on would be to a super low floor design and with NDP support and the replacement vehicles within our own company, we have been able to adhere to that. By the end of this year almost 40% of the Bus Átha Cliath fleet will be of this fully accessible, low floor design. We continue to evaluate different types of buses and at present ten of the articulated type of vehicles are in service. We are hoping very shortly to evaluate a triaxle double deck vehicle which would be a people mover for the QBCs. We are striving to get the experience of the latest vehicles and find the best for Dublin. These vehicles for people with special needs and mothers with buggies are important.

We have made great improvements in the area of ticketing and information to the customer and very shortly we will have a system where people can interrogate the timetable with a phone. We also have two corridors where the real-time information shows the arrival time of the next bus and we hope to roll that out across the network in the future. We have listed all the other work we do in the media in the written report.

Pre-paid tickets are popular. People have a choice of three, five or seven day tickets with unlimited travel. We have grown this business by 40% in the last couple of years, which shows its attraction. The tax benefit saving scheme has proved very popular, with over 800 companies now enlisted.

Regarding integrated ticketing and intermodal travel, we are currently proposing to replace the ticket equipment system. This will embrace the smart card and will deliver the potential for smooth travel from bus to DART to suburban rail to Luas, which the RPA is designing. We are currently working on a system of feeder buses at particular locations for the new tram system.

Quality of service to the customer is part of the customer focus work we launched a few years ago. This has brought about tremendous benefits, interfacing with the customer by means of customer panels in order to get first-hand responses. We also have the customer charter which is a continual day by day monitoring process, with professional mystery shoppers and also an assessment by the actual users. We have an open door policy and are always pleased to welcome queries and feedback regarding any problems or information sought.

Some recent innovations include the automated bus timetable already mentioned. Bus Átha Cliath has developed substantial improvements in quality of service to the customer during recent years. We continue to deliver a comprehensive service to all the communities in Dublin and we are committed to making a good contribution to transportation with regard to the needs of the customer in the future.

Thank you. I now call on Mr. Bill Lilley, managing director of Bus Éireann.

Mr. Bill Lilley

I welcome this opportunity to meet the committee and to answer any questions members may have with regard to Bus Éireann and road passenger transport in general. I am joined by my colleagues Tim Hayes, business development manager, and Martin Nolan, finance manager and company secretary.

Bus Éireann is a member of the CIE group of companies and its statutory mandate is to provide road passenger services throughout the State and outside the State with the exception of city services in Dublin. The Transport (Reorganisation of Córas Iompair Éireann) Act 1986 states: "The board and the companies shall have due regard to the board's social role and the need to maintain public transport services integrated to the maximum extent possible within the financial resources available to them." This is a very important statement.

To meet this mandate, we provide an integrated and responsive range of services, principally inter-urban expressway, provincial city and town services, and rural and commuter services. We also manage the schools transport scheme on behalf of the Department of Education and Science. Total revenues in 2002 were €224 million. We employ 2,600 staff, of whom approximately 1,800 are drivers. Approximately 25% of all services are provided by private contractors at a cost in 2002 of €60 million.

In the past two years, road passenger journeys have increased by 15% from 40 million to 46 million, while in most other western European countries, numbers have declined. We have recognised for some time the changing environment in which we operate and have been shaping ourselves to meet the increasing challenges we face now and will obviously face in the future. We have agreements with our staff which have improved efficiency. For example, we have improved resource utilisation. We have removed demarcation so that we have multi-skilling in garages. We have increased flexibility, having extended the use of contracted private operators. We have also introduced extensive training and development programmes such as advanced driving, disability awareness courses and strategic management development.

Bus Éireann has, historically, been financially sound. Since its inception in 1987 it has invested €129 million in fleet and equipment, with State grants accounting for €26 million of this sum. However, the accelerated major expansion of services under the NDP resulted in 2002 in losses of €9 million. That was considerably less than anticipated halfway through the year. It also eliminated our cash reserves, which at the beginning of the NDP stood at €20 million. Our 2003 business plan shows Bus Éireann returning to break even and we are currently on target to do so.

The major factor in Bus Éireann's success is quality of service in the form of significant increases in the range and frequency of service, better vehicles, customer information and so on. Our customer satisfaction rating has improved year on year. We have introduced a wider network and increased departures. The average age of vehicles in the road passenger fleet has been reduced to less than four years and we have undertaken an extensive programme of bus station development. I have included in the report some charts relating to our customer service. Information has also been supplied relating to an independent survey produced recently.

Our IT developments include an Internet journey planner and the first on-bus validation of e-ticketing in Europe, introduced a few months ago. Bus Éireann operates expressway services on an extensive network integrated with local services utilising private contractors to supplement our own resources. We have continued to develop clock-face hourly services operating on the main routes such as Dublin to Limerick and Galway, Galway to Limerick and Cork and Tralee to Cork and Waterford. For example, one can get a bus every hour from Cork to Waterford, Tralee, Killarney, Limerick and through to Galway. There are also two-hourly services from Cork to Dublin and to west Cork.

Ticketing on our services is fully integrated. Customers can purchase one ticket at the start of the journey, which gives a discount over the sum of the individual journeys undertaken. Additionally, time tables are interlinked to provide onward connection. A good example is Dingle-Killybegs, which includes two local services and three expressway services. The committee has been supplied with a chart showing that the journey for through tickets would cost €26 for a single fare, while a single ticket booked for each of the individual journeys would cost about €57. The return fare is €41.50 for the through ticket, compared to €91.50 for tickets bought individually, so there is considerable integrated discounting coming into play on all services throughout the country.

In the past two years, at the request of Government, we expanded commuter and provincial city services significantly to cater for the key objective of modal shift. Dublin commuter services increased by over 50% as did some regional commuter services such as Limerick-Shannon, Tramore-Waterford, Kinsale-Cork and Oranmore-Galway. Peak frequency services every 15 minutes were introduced, for example, on the Kells-Navan-Dublin route, where we have 25 vehicles carrying 1,200 customers at peak, and Drogheda-Balbriggan-Dublin, with 40 services per day each way. The provincial city services, that is, in Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford, were increased by over 40% and frequencies on some routes were more than doubled, for example, Grange and CIT in Cork, Lisbeg Lawn in Galway, Clareview-Coonagh in Limerick and Brownes Road in Waterford.

We introduced additional town services in Navan, Athlone, Sligo, Dundalk and Drogheda. These increased services, particularly the additional peak hour services, have increased losses in the business. They are inherently loss-making in any business. The last decade has seen significant expansion in local and rural services, such as Ballina to Killala, from eight to 18 buses per week, Sligo to Manorhamiliton from ten to 22 buses per week and Tralee to Killorglin from eight to 35 buses per week. Additionally, 40 one-day-weekly services utilising school transport resources have been developed, for example, Kilcrohane to Bantry and Feakle to Ennis in County Clare.

In Bus Éireann we are very conscious of the need to demonstrate that we are providing value for money, both to the customer and the taxpayer. Our fares are low compared to European averages.

Since 1990 they have increased by approximately 25%, while CPI has increased by almost 40% and payroll inflation by almost 50%. We provide extensive discounted through-ticketing in addition to student, daily and monthly returns and multi-journey discounts. The subsidy we receive in respect of public service obligation is also low by European standards. The schools transport scheme caters for approximately 135,000 children twice daily. The services are provided in accordance with the instructions and guidelines of the Department of Education and Science. Private Contractors carry approximately 50% of those pupils and are paid 55% of the scheme's cost. Bus Éireann is responsible for the application of standards and controls agreed with the Department and closely liaises with schools and the Department regarding the safety and care of children. Various reports have concluded that Bus Éireann provides the most effective and efficient management of schools transport.

Bus Éireann has developed its customer-focused business, via partnership with staff and Government agencies, into an effective and efficient transport management operation. That involves effective network design and management in conjunction with efficient operation, continuous improvement of systems and processes, subcontracting and so on. For the future, Bus Éireann's strategic plan outlines improvements in service frequency and capacity across its range of services and bus station upgrading at Busáras, Cork, Galway and Sligo. The key focus will be on customer care, efficiency and effectiveness.

We are targeting cost reductions associated with traffic congestion through bus priority measures which will also facilitate modal shift. Incidentally, the first meeting for traffic congestion measures outside Dublin takes place tomorrow in Limerick. Traffic congestion cost Bus Éireann €18 million in 2002, taking average European speeds into account. Critically, we will continue our focus on the safety and well-being of school children with the Department of Education and Science.

We have benchmarked ourselves with other operations throughout Europe. Bus Éireann is a high class operator by international standards, providing high quality, customer focus, improved frequency and a range of services in an integrated network. Bus Éireann continues to provide value for money to its customers and the taxpayer. It is increasingly flexible, efficient and effective and has made considerable progress via partnership in recent years. The company will continue to respond to the market through continuous change.

Thank you very much. Perhaps we might allow members to ask Bus Átha Cliath questions first rather than chopping and changing from one group to the other.

Why are certain corridors more successful than others? Some, such as Stillorgan, get great praise, whereas on the Navan Road route, all one hears is major complaints about buses.

Dr. Westwell

There are a number of features. Where there is a dual carriageway, that helps establish a clear track, and a bus can then show a greatly reduced time. Where there is no dual carriageway, road space is scarce, and that is harder to achieve. Transportation teams have tried to achieve compromise across the board between cyclists, motorists, traders and pedestrians. Perhaps we should be more focused, particularly in peak periods, if the transportation is dependent on public transport.

Some corridors have greater potential than others. Will people get a lift to a location to get on a bus or walk or cycle? In Stillorgan there has been a 232% increase in peak morning use. It is unique, and people from across the world are coming to see it, for they do not believe it. If one goes to such places as Foxrock or Stillorgan Shopping Centre in the morning, one sees people flooding in from all directions, coming from Dundrum, since they know that once they arrive at that quality bus corridor, they can be sure of being in the city centre within 30 minutes. Of the nine QBCs we currently have some need upgrading. Some could become super QBCs. The outer part of the Blanchardstown corridor must be improved for buses. The centre spine is very effective on the dual carriageway but, as we approach the city centre, Stoneybatter and the Quays, it loses ground. Our category one, to improve existing corridors, is the challenge, and the director of traffic and his team are aware of that.

Navan Road seems to get a great many complaints, whereas the other gets a huge number of compliments, and I congratulate you on that. To be quite open with you, when the QBC was being brought in at Stillorgan, I did not believe that it would work, but it did. Well done.

I welcome both groups. My first question concerns Bus Átha Cliath. Regarding real time information on the west side of the city, what does Bus Átha Cliath envisage as the time scale for roll-out? Perhaps Dr. Westwell might also elaborate on the level of subcontracting involved in Dublin Bus at the moment. In his contribution he raised an issue regarding the quality bus corridors. There has been an increase in use of 38% at peak times, but is it not the case that a significant part of that increase has been a shift in passengers from other routes on to the QBCs and that the overall carrying capacity of Dublin Bus has not increased to the target envisaged at the time the QBCs were established?

A point was made regarding integrated ticketing, which is crucially important if we are to encourage people to use public transport. When will the new smart-card system be in place, and will the other transport companies servicing the greater Dublin area, Bus Éireann, the new Luas service and Iarnród Éireann, be able to use it? Will there be interconnectivity in that regard? I know Bus Éireann has invested in electronic tickets over the Internet. Can they be utilised by both services? There is no point in bringing in a new ticketing system unless we can have the required integration.

What is the view on the challenge represented by the competition proposals from the Minister for Transport, which will change the face of transport in Dublin? Does Bus Átha Cliath see it as such? There are currently 23 different agencies involved in transport in Dublin. It seems very unco-ordinated. Dublin Bus deals with many different agencies. At what stage is park and ride, tying in with the QBCs? If QBCs are to be successful, one must have park and ride facilities tied in with them. What is the view on the establishment of the authority and how it should be structured?

Perhaps Dr. Westwell might also elaborate on transparency regarding route performance, the receipt of subventions for various routes, and where there is cross-subsidy. Please comment on the prohibition of services by the Department of Transport. In certain parts of the city private operators have been provided with contracts to run services but are not doing so. Dublin Bus seems to be unable to provide a service for those communities because a contract has already been awarded to a private operator who is currently not providing a service.

I, too, welcome the two bus companies. In recent years, much of the emphasis in the discussion of public transport has been on the more high-profile projects such as Luas and Metro. However, in recent years a gentle revolution has been taking place regarding the progress made by the two bus companies in turning them around and making them much more responsive once they got a modest increase in the level of subvention. Both companies have shown what they were capable of with adequate funding. Much of the bad-mouthing that goes on about the public transport companies comes from people who have not travelled on the bus for years. I represent a constituency entirely dependent on buses for public transport. In all honesty Dublin Bus is one of the better agencies with which I deal in terms of its response to representations and its willingness to design services that meet the needs of the community.

In the context of the Minister's proposals to privatise 25% of services and his ideological hang-up on the importance of competition, irrespective of whether it will result in better services for the public, I wish to ask about the level of subvention.

I thought that was a Labour direction.

Perhaps I got the signals wrong at Killarney.

We were talking about customer focus being the key. In respect of public transport companies, we have to learn from the experience of other countries where privatisation has been a disaster, particularly in the UK.

We are still learning.

On the issue of subvention, it is hard to make comparisons between the subvention levels in Ireland and in other European countries because we do not know the exact subvention to each of the bus companies and the operating subvention on its own. When the Minister speaks about how much is allocated to the various transport companies he includes also capital expenditure. Does Dr. Westwell have information on the percentage of the operation costs that are subvented here and some comparative figures for other EU countries? In respect of licences, would he agree that the greatest need in the area of public transport is a public transport regulator? At present it is difficult to know how the system operates. I have come across situations in the greater Dublin area where there was a crying need for a new route, in terms of new housing estates. Application is made to Dublin Bus to provide a service and often Dublin Bus say that it is not allowed provide the service because the Minister is waiting for competition or there is a request in from a private operator but the private operator is not running a service. This is a grey area. Exactly how does the system work with regard to a request to the Department to grant a licence for a new service? How often would that request be turned down? Sometimes Dublin Bus is blamed for not providing services. I know it is not allowed do so by the Department. Can the delegation explain how that operates, particularly in the west Dublin area where there are many new housing estates?

On the issue of cross-subsidisation in the context of proposed privatisation, obviously the profitable routes will be cherry picked as has happened in other countries where the service has been privatised. How many of the routes would be profitable? Is it not the case that if some of those profitable routes are franchised out there will be a net loss to the State, because the profit from those routes is used to cross-subsidise the non-profitable routes, which are important from the point of view of social infrastructure. What percentage of routes are profitable? Has Dublin Bus done the sums on what will happen in respect of its public service requirement and the additional cost that will be involved for the taxpayer in the event of losing any of those profitable routes?

I would remind the Deputy of the time.

I wish to ask three more questions. What is the most urgent thing that needs to be done to improve QBCs? Is it policing of the routes, physical obstructions or the lack of co-ordination between local authorities? On the issue of park and ride, the trend seems to have moved from that idea on grounds of cost. Dublin City Council is talking about feeder buses going to housing estates rather than the more expensive option of a park and ride facility. Does Dr. Westwell agree with that view? In regard to the Special Olympics - a matter I have tried to raise with the Minister - has consideration been given to providing a concessionary ticket for the thousands of volunteers who will accompany participants, as a goodwill gesture in the year that is in it?

I welcome Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann and thank them for their presentations. I apologise that I missed the presentation by Bus Éireann. My questions are primarily for Dr. Westwell. In page 4 of his presentation he estimates that 80% of the route network still operates over non-QBCs. I appreciate we are dealing with averages but what parts of those routes are not proper QBCs, particularly on the Blanchardstown route which comes in along the Navan Road and goes into a single lane so that buses have to compete with other traffic? I presume the sum of €34 million for the cost of congestion is broken down by routes. In the context of the Minister and Dublin City Council speaking about rolling out new QBCs, is there much point in doing this until we learn from the lessons of the past and eliminate all the bottlenecks? How does Dublin Bus envisage doing that? I appreciate that we are looking at points 1 to 5, on page 4 of the presentation which are for new routes. What representations have been made to eliminate bottlenecks on existing routes?

The hard shoulder on the M50 was discussed recently as a possible route. What are the long-term or the short-term implications or advantages, if any? Some Deputies here have raised the issue of the licensing system. Of the licences issued since 1996, how many have been taken up by private operators? Are there examples of crazy licences issued to Dublin Bus? I am aware of one licence having been issued to Clonee by the Department which forbids Dublin Bus to collect or drop off passengers at eight bus stops on an existing route? Does Dublin Bus contemplate taking up that type of licence? What was the rationale for such a licence? Have other similar licences been given to Dublin Bus which are not operational and would lead to inefficiencies?

Dr. Westwell

I will try to respond. Deputy Naughten asked about the real time information and the time scale for roll-out. Customer research shows that if one can be told that a bus is coming in ten or 15 minutes that is quite reassuring and, therefore, communicating information is important. In the transport industry, it is held as a key feature for confidence to the travelling public. Therefore, it is envisaged that throughout the Dublin area on the corridors it would unfold for transport for rail, Luas and the buses. Those two corridors, probably a couple of years ago, were at a price base of about £1 million. That sounds costly. On the other hand the measure has to be on cost-benefit terms. Subject to the availability of funding we would envisage this could be brought in over a three to five year period, as they have in London over that timescale. In regard to subcontracting, I mentioned that the school contract work was achieved a few years ago where school children who travelled on the Dublin service network were arranged on to separate private school buses, thereby releasing BAC buses for the journey to work. That appears to be a good way of increasing the capacity in the peak hour. On the engineering side, for example, all the excellent day cleaning work is carried out by a private contractor. In the different aspects across the company, therefore, where it is appropriate or cost effective we are endeavouring to drive in that direction.

On the quality bus corridors, a 38% increase was mentioned. That figure came from a factual measurement which indicated that 138,500 people were travelling on those routes prior to the introduction of the QBCs and in 2001 in the cordon count in November, as members are aware, on the canal ring. So when the Deputy said people were moving from one location to another and that the 38% was not a real increase, that is not the case because all the corridors are captured at that time in the morning and that 38% is the difference between 138,500 and 195,500 after those QBCs were put in place. That is recorded in the DTO report by all the agencies putting that in.

People are going across the canal.

Dr. Westwell

That is right, inward. That was the measure prior to the introduction of QBCs and then in 2001. Also, in this last cordon count in 2002, the latest information I have seen is that there has been a further increase in bus usage year on, year on, which is very encouraging. On the modal split to the city centre, where we get the rail coming in as well, the bus contribution has increased from 36.8% to 40.5%, so the DTI policies are now shown to be working. Although that figure might sound low for the city centre, the rail contribution to the city centre is very good. If we look at the separate roads, for example, the Malahide corridor was 44% modal split for bus before the QBC came in for the bus, and it increased to 56%. On those main QBCs where it is road-based bus dominated, the modal shift has moved in favour of the bus.

If we go back to the overall macro policy in the DTI, of which the members will be aware, the first objective was to move the modal split in favour of public transport to try to get people to work or education in the morning. These QBCs work and people are prepared to use them in the morning, provided they get them into the city, but in terms of the evenings we still have to work at some of them in terms of all the traffic. The point was made that there has not been an increase and that it is only movement of other people but that is not my understanding of all the analysis work, which is recorded in the reports. There is a genuine increase in respect of the cordon count and also on the other QBCs - Stillorgan, 230% - with most of the others being about 40%. The Finglas corridor is very effective. Initially it had a 10% increase but then fell back slightly, and to a direction. The north Clondalkin corridor still needs to be worked at.

In regard to the category one, which shows the existing QBCs, what everyone has achieved is excellent but there is tremendous scope to keep at it. The other aspect is that they can go off the boil and therefore from an operational point of view we are continuing to measure the pinch points and the delays and feed that information to the city council, the local authorities and the DTO. I am sorry to go on about it.

On the targets, there never were targets when people drew the QBC lines on the strategy. Although we said the broad objective was to move the modal shift, I do not believe I ever saw any targets being set but obviously the objective was to try to move people from private to public transport.

On the smart card, we have been working with the RPA on the specification for this over the past two years. It is capable of being developed into the all-swinging, total inter-modal system which they are looking for but the smart card will definitely benefit inter-travel between bus, the Luas and the rail network. We are looking at horizons in that regard. We are currently working on the ticketing equipment. Its life expired and we flagged the fact that it needed to be replaced five years ago but it will be capable of having a smart card.

When is it hoped to have that in place?

Dr. Westwell

Probably by the end of next year. We just signed the contract. It will come on stream depot by depot towards the end of 2004 and into 2005. It will probably be towards 2005 when the whole system is in place. We are working with Luas on a complementary way and the aim, therefore, is that the two systems will be complementary.

Is everybody on board with regard to this project? You said it has potential but is everybody singing from the same hymn sheet in terms of integrating all of this or are some people dragging their heels on it?

Dr. Westwell

As members are aware, the RPA has now been given responsibility and accountability to design the system and to lay down the specification, and our system now complies with that. It has signed off on that. We have got magnetic ticketing, as have other operators, and therefore there will be a transition as it occurs. In terms of all the others being on board, the RPA is indicating that will be the policy and people will need to come in line with it.

You are not really answering the question. It appears that not everybody is enthusiastic.

Dr. Westwell

I can only speak on behalf of Bus Átha Cliath but there are independent operators and others who are having separate discussions currently with the RPA on designing the system.

It seems an awfully long and complicated time. As somebody pointed out, 100 years ago one could get an integrated ticket in Dawson Street and we cannot do it today.

Dr. Westwell

As members know, we have a range of prepaid tickets for short and long hops with which one can travel on the DART or the bus. I realise the ticket must be bought beforehand but that range is almost like an integrated ticketing system, and people do not appreciate that.

On competition, every consumer wants competition and choice and that is desirable from the consumer's point of view. On the question of different sectors, there are benefits and disadvantages to that. Public transport is unique. It offers services in a scarce area. Examples can be given from across the world of genuine fierce competition with operators fighting to get to bus stops. That is dangerous and it has been highlighted in the United Kingdom. On the consultative documents to date, that was not the intention in the Irish situation. It is more akin to the London situation and therefore these decisions have not yet been taken. We will see how the situation unfolds when decisions have been taken on the type of system.

A total of 23 agencies was mentioned. Colleagues in other countries believe the greater Dublin area and Ireland generally have done a tremendous job. At the political level we have seen in recent years the commitment to policies and funding. In terms of the local authorities, the director of traffic and the DTO, when agencies get together they will never all see eye to eye but there is the commitment and the funding and we have delivered a great deal, despite the 23 agencies. One can say we can have a more simplified system, which is interesting.

On the Garda using the bus lanes, people are amazed to see motor cyclists travelling on our system.

Four of them——

Dr. Westwell

I am aware they have a system and we are pleased with their presence. In London some time ago, Peter Hendley, the head of transport for London, said he wanted to come here to talk to the commissioner. When I was in Strathclyde the chief of police used to say that unless bus priority was self-enforcing, they would not wish to police it, so we are pleased with the contribution the Garda make in achieving what has been achieved. There have been reports recently from the DTO and other agencies on park and ride. If one were to look back at the early days of the DTI, strategically located car parks were not part of the DTI. They have had advice lately from a number of park and ride sites in the UK and it has studied the costs: land acquisition, funding and operating the buses. As we know that is all quite costly but park and ride gives motorists who want to use it a benefit.

Regarding QBCs, we have heard about motorists giving lifts to people to get to QBCs. Deputy Shortall mentioned bus feeders. We listened to people in the early days of the QBC and to get a feeder to a QBC and take one's chances with another queue was neither a smooth transition nor what we were trying to do. Therefore on some QBCs vehicles start from particular locations and then act as a feeder to the QBC but also run down the QBC, which avoids additional private vehicles and ideally dovetails with the system.

A pilot scheme was sought for park and ride and there were 30 potential sites in 1996. That did not come off. Recently another pilot scheme was sought, and the DTO should look for first hand experience of its potential strengths and benefits. Looking at other countries, once they are part of the transportation plan they have a contribution to make.

Was there a question on private contractors?

What is the number of private contractors? For example, Bus Éireann would have a significant number of private contractors on its Expressway routes, quite apart from the school transport system. There must be routes which are at maximum capacity at peak hours; has the possibility of using private contractors at such times been examined? It would not cost as much as purchasing additional buses.

Dr. Westwell

We have looked at private contractors as part of the ongoing strategy and plans. We are looking at the potential of the private operator, as in the case of the 60 vehicles and the private operators which help us in that activity. There is potential here for that.

The answer is that at the moment they are not being used.

Dr. Westwell

Other than school services——

Apart from the school services——

Dr. Westwell

That was stage 1. We were then looking at other services. We were looking at other services with this concept, focusing on our best role as a semi-State. We were looking at complementary roles for the QBC and the private operator. We have studied this and there is a potential way forward.

Deputy Shortall mentioned the subvention. We have the figures for the operational subvention year by year as well as for the capital funding we received. On benchmarking we have sent people to other countries to shake out information; we have found this very misleading. People say of other countries: "Look, they are far superior to you", but when one goes to such countries one finds one may not have been told everything. There are about five benchmarking exercises going on around the world in different countries and in various areas.

We were very low. In 1996-97 we were down to 3% subvention, so we had 97% coming from the fare box with a very old bus fleet before the QBCs. It was recognised there was no funding to replace vehicles and we were not making a commercial profit. We saw a step change from then to the present in that it has stabilised in the past three years at approximately 25%. The reasons for that is the transportation policy and the NDP called for a 30% increase in the peak hour fleet - a dramatic increase. The additional subvention required for those vehicles was one feature. There was also a labour cost increase in 2000, when we had a package for new recruits for 18 months. We found we were not recruiting the people we required but we are now just in line with the average industrial wage and we are getting good, reliable services. They were the two reasons for the increase.

Looking at other countries, coming up to 25% is excellent. We are also looking at a range of other issues. We asked for an independent appraisal as we had not had a fares increase for nine years, 1991 to 2000, €27 million more could have been raised. Transport authority costs are funded differently in other countries, as is network design; we do all that. VAT is 21% on a new bus in Ireland and that flows through into depreciation.

What is the operating subvention for this year? Dr. Westwell mentioned a chart but that is not in the hand-out circulated.

Dr. Westwell

No.

Maybe we should get copies of that.

Dr. Westwell

The total is 26% of the total operating costs.

Dr. Westwell

It is of other countries.

Perhaps the clerk could photocopy and circulate it.

Dr. Westwell

On the licences, in November 2000 guidelines were put in place. At that time the Department was calling for private operators to apply for licences. There was a two-month moratorium when we could not move things on. Thereafter, because of the volume of activity - roadworks problems and so on - we had discussions with the Department. We then operated within a certain frequency of route change for 18 months and had to advise the Department when we went outside that envelope. More recently that envelope has not applied.

We had a hub and spoke experiment in Skerries and we wanted to put it back in place two years later. People felt it had not worked so we had a delay in putting it back; we felt it should go back once everyone was agreed and it is now in place.

Blanchardstown was mentioned. We get the bulk of our plans approved, within the guidelines; some are delayed and there are some on which we do not get agreement. In the cases mentioned, where we are told they can have a licence but we cannot pick up or set down at five stops in the middle, we go back and argue on that and the Department of Transport is open to hearing the case. We say it is impractical or not helpful to the customer in making our case.

A question was asked about the QBC's best feature - there are many little things. In Donnybrook there were lamp-posts at the pavement edge by the fire brigade and for two years the buses could not get past cars in the next lane. Now those are gone and the buses are going through.

On the Special Olympics, we agreed that the 15,000 volunteers would be charged at a child rate and that would be our contribution to the games. The organisers are very pleased with that arrangement. As a result, we are identified as friends on the comprehensive leaflet about all the services.

Senator Morrissey asked about the existing QBCs. The measurements to date have only taken the effective parts of the QBC so in the eyes of the DTO, the Stillorgan QBC finishes at Foxrock and from where it goes down to Dún Laoghaire it is not regarded as a QBC. On the Malahide Road, it finishes when it goes right around Darndale. We do not recognise that definition. When a passenger gets on a bus, he or she boards a bus on a QBC into the city. We want to see improvement on the outer area of the Blanchardstown QBC. The dual carriageway section is good but we want further improvements through Stoneybatter and in the city centre. The M50 hard shoulder would be difficult for buses. I note that the NRA has views as has South Dublin, although there is an orbital route earmarked for it. I covered the question of licences and procedures. I do not wish to take up all the time.

I apologise in advance to the members of Bus Éireann because I have a commitment to attend another meeting but I will watch a recording of their replies later.

I thank the representatives for attending this meeting. I missed the earlier part where there was a question and answer session with Bus ÁthaCliath. I compliment Bus Átha Cliath for the tremendous strides that have clearly been made in recent years in terms of efficiency and the colossal amount of capital investment which can only be applauded.

I have three brief questions for Bus Éireann. I do not live in Dublin so my interest is mainly in Bus Éireann. There appears to be a fundamental objection by Bus Éireann to the privatisation of bus routes outside of Dublin. In my native city of Limerick there are concrete examples of people who have had very viable proposals to initiate bus routes which were well costed and researched. These would have enhanced the public transport system in my city. I am using the example of Limerick as a template for other cities outside of Dublin. The resistance has been quite astonishing. I would call it an institutional resistance to the notion of allowing other people compete on existing bus routes. I know this subject will be discussed in more detail in times to come.

I note the assertion that Bus Éireann has historically been financially sound. Will Bus Éireann elaborate on that statement? What would be the position but for the subventions since 1987 when the Act was passed?

I understand there will be a meeting in Limerick tomorrow on QBCs or the issue of congestion in so far as it relates to Bus Éireann. I wish the company well in that meeting because I certainly know that congestion is causing enormous problems. To what extent is the company encountering more difficulty outside of Dublin than appears to be the case in Dublin in securing local consent for QBCs? I applaud its efforts to do so but it appears to me that there is very strong resistance to the QBCs.

I welcome Bus Éireann to the meeting. I have a greater knowledge of the Bus Éireann service than of the Dublin Bus service. I compliment Bus Éireann in the same way Deputy Shortall has complimented Dublin Bus on being extremely pro-active in developing new services. There has been a dramatic improvement in both the quality and the volume of service being provided by Bus Éireann's expressway service and the rural transport service.

Now that I have given out the compliments, I will begin with the stick. At the moment the buses on the expressway route services are approximately four years old. That is not the case with the Bus Éireann buses used for the school transport fleet. They are still using buses which are about 20 years old. I know the next buses to be replaced are the VS buses and I ask for an update on when these buses will be replaced. The Bus Éireann drivers have made numerous complaints to management regarding these buses. I know there are problems with them. They were originally imported from Singapore. When will the school transport fleet be modernised? Will the witness elaborate on the numbers of school transport buses that are used for the provision of other services? If those buses are being used for other services, then there is a financial incentive to ensure they are of a higher quality rather than that school buses are just used for a number of hours during the day providing school transport services. Will the company examine the option of utilising those buses for other services in order to increase their usage?

On ticketing, Bus Éireann is to be congratulated for its introduction of e-ticketing. By 2005 will it be possible to use one ticket to travel on the number 90 bus to Heuston Station and the train to Athlone and pick up a Bus Éireann connection to Birr or somewhere else? I know Bus Éireann has integrated ticketing but that is still an internal arrangement and there does not seem to be cross-integration. Park and ride for the expressway service is more important for the utilisation of the expressway service. For example, the difficulty in relation to park and ride in Athlone is not to be on time for the bus but rather to be in time to get a parking space for the car. The nearest parking is one mile away from the bus due to changes in policy by the town council.

The proposals on deregulation are to privatise or remove the expressway and break up Bus Éireann into a number of different layers and to privatise some elements of it. I would like Mr. Lilley to elaborate his views on that and especially his views on the proposed establishment of three new authorities to regulate bus transport outside the Dublin area which would lead to four authorities on a national basis, two regional, one in Dublin and an overall regulatory authority. If this were put in place, along with the introduction of competition, would some of those charges be passed on to the consumer thus resulting in a loss of efficiencies? What is the future for competition and how will this develop in the next few years?

I welcome the representatives from Bus Éireann whom I congratulate. Not many organisations can boast a 91% satisfaction rating among its customers. I have similar questions to those I posed for the representatives of Dublin Bus. What is Bus Éireann's operating subvention for the current year and how does this compare with national bus services in other EU states? What percentage of licence applications has been refused by the Department of Transport? I will again pose a question to which I received no reply from Dublin Bus - perhaps I will get a reply from Bus Éireann. Does Mr.Lilley accept that the most urgent need for the bus industry now is for a bus regulator to be appointed?

Given the difficulty in knowing just where responsibility and accountability lie, it seems to be a hit and miss thing. When bus companies apply for a new licence the Department may or may not grant them. It is not possible to know what other players might be waiting in the wings. Can Mr. Lilley give his comments on that?

I would like Mr. Lilley's comments on the service from Cavan. A number of residents spoke of a very successful new service Bus Éireann provided under the NDP arrangements with both 6 a.m. and 7 a.m. services from Cavan to Dublin. Recently, Bus Éireann was instructed to discontinue that service because a private operator wanted to become involved. The private operator ran a bus at 6.30 a.m. which did not suit people. The timing was wrong and there was inadequate capacity. How can the semi-State company, which is providing a service under the NDP, be told to get off the road?

In the area of cross-subsidisation, what percentage of Bus Éireann's routes is profitable and what is the extent of its public service obligation? Mr. Lilley mentioned the high cost of traffic congestion to the operation of the company - presumably mainly in city areas. How does he feel that can best be addressed? What is needed most urgently to reduce congestion?

While I am sorry I missed the presentation earlier, l look forward to reading the submission. Does Bus Éireann see itself in competition with Iarnród Éireann in getting new customers? As discussed with the representatives of Dublin Bus, I am interested to hear the views of Bus Éireann on the use of hard shoulders on the approach routes to Dublin and particularly the M50. Are there any estimates as to the time savings that would give Bus Éireann and the effects for its fleet capacity? Are there any international precedents for this? Are there international standards for the widths available and how they could be used? What negotiations has Bus Éireann had with the local authorities or the NRA on the use of hard shoulders or other design features of the road to allow better access to Dublin city?

Mr. Lilley

In answer to Deputy Power's questions, I am not aware that we fundamentally object to any applications, because we are not normally aware of applications. We are only ever aware when something starts on a particular route. We are not privileged to that information. That information is with the Department. I certainly have no information that we have ever objected to anybody putting a route in. We do not object. That is a matter for the Department. I am not aware of any operators in Limerick that have put forward business cases to operate routes in Limerick city, nor could I be.

Deputy Power asked if we are financially sound. It is only in the past year that Bus Éireann showed a deficit, which we will recover this year. This was solely due to the fact that we put a tremendous number of extra services in place on the commuting and city services, which are inherently loss making. These are peak hour services. These were done in accordance with the requirements of Government under the NDP. They were verified, as far as the Dublin area was concerned, by the Scott Wilson report, which stated quite clearly that Bus Éireann would need a much higher level of subvention than it had at present and confirmed that these routes would be inherently loss making, as they are.

Up to that point in time, the highest subvention Bus Éireann ever received was about €5 million or €6 million. Since 1987 its lowest was €1.7 million. The reason for that was that we are cross-subsidising from our profitable Expressway services and other profitable parts of the business. We have never had the public service obligation services fully paid for by subvention. Certainly we are financially sound. During the presentation, I mentioned that at the beginning of the NDP we had £20 million in reserves, which we used up in investing in the significant improvements we made in the fleet in addition to some Government grants.

How much was given in Government grants?

Mr. Lilley

We have had €26 million in Government grants out of a total investment of €129 million.

Limerick congestion was mentioned. It is much more difficult to get any discussion going of QBCs outside Dublin. Local consent has just not been forthcoming. As I mentioned earlier, we are starting the discussions tomorrow under the patronage of the Department with both local authorities and the NRA and involving our own management. We have three "green routes" as they are called planned for Cork city. One has just been announced for Galway. However there is no movement yet in Limerick and none in Waterford. However we are hoping to progress that over the next few months.

I thank Deputy Naughten for his compliments. The average age of our road passenger fleet is four years, but it ranges from zero, for our new vehicles just coming in, to ten. It is our policy to try to avoid using any vehicle that is in excess of ten years old on the road passenger fleet. As far as school buses are concerned, we do not have any vehicles at all that are in excess of 20 years of age and the average age is, in fact, less than 16 years. We have put in an extensive programme of replacement of old vehicles in the past three years. It must be borne in mind that these vehicles are principally for the use of schools and practically in all cases are for the use of schools. I will come to the point about road passenger later on - it is a very small one. We have had to invest significantly in vehicles. The maximum investment we can make under the ground rules laid down by the Department was £1,800 a year write-off up to a couple of years ago. The Department of Education and Science increased that to £3,000, as it was at the time, over a ten-year period. We could afford to invest up to £30,000 in a bus for school transport and that was written off over a period of ten years against the school transport scheme. We had to find the funding. School transport is a cost recovery operation. We operate in a very tight situation.

On the VS vehicles, we purchased more than 300 of those from Singapore, some years ago, because there was nothing else available. Being from Singapore, they were right hand drive vehicles. They were never the best, being designed to operate in tropical climates and were not designed for Irish roads. They have not served too well.

What age are they?

Mr. Lilley

They are less than 20 years old. At this stage, I am very happy that there are only 60 of them remaining and we will have got rid of those by the first few months of next year, at the latest - preferably in the latter months of this year.

What effect will that have on the average age of vehicles?

Mr. Lilley

It would maintain the average age, which is hovering around 15 or 16. The policy is to provide vehicles that are no more than 20 years old. We also cascade from our own fleet. We have been purchasing second hand buses, particularly in Britain, at nine or ten years of age to stay within the financial constraints. They are good quality vehicles. I am often amused when people say that a bus must be unsafe because it is old. In London Transport, one will find 30 and 40 year old vehicles still operating on the red routes. There is nothing wrong with such vehicles, as long as they are properly maintained - age has nothing to do with it. Our vehicles are properly maintained; we have a regime in place which is second to none.

With regard to passenger usage, I mentioned that we have 40 one-day-a-week services, utilising school vehicles. Approximately 20 of those services are with contractors, so about 20 of our vehicles are used on one-day-a-week services. Obviously, we maintain those vehicles as best we can. I do not suggest they are our best 20 vehicles in the school fleet, they are certainly not, but they are of decent quality. However, this is a very small part of the operation and the schools transport scheme is credited with the use of those vehicles. Accordingly, it is a small benefit to the school transport scheme that the use of those vehicles is charged to the road passenger side of the business.

The issue on park and ride facilities is a difficult one, as was evident from the Dublin Bus presentation. As far as expressway is concerned, we do not see park and ride as being an issue. It normally arises with commuting. Because of the spread of the greater Dublin area, with tentacles going west, north and south, there are people commuting from Athlone on the early morning service. People bring their cars and hope to park them, but we have no provision and no plans to provide park and ride facilities at this stage. It will be a matter of funding, if it ever arises.

With regard to the SDG - Steer Davies Gleave - proposals, anybody who has studied the SDG report or summaries thereof will be aware that, in many respects, it was complimentary to Bus Éireann. We agree with some of the body of the report and some of the conclusions. However, the recommendations which followed the conclusions can only be described as bizarre. They just did not relate to what was in the body of the report.

On the question of regional structure and overall authorities, one must remember that the Irish State has a population of less than four million, which is similar to the population within a 25 mile radius of central Manchester. Manchester has one authority. I cannot, for the life of me, see the need for discussion on regionalised authority - it just does not make any sense, by comparison with other countries. For example, the greater Copenhagen area, which has more than two million people, has a regulator with a staff of more than 300 people, costing €24 million in 2001. That is more than the annual subvention to Bus Éireann. People need to look carefully at such matters and understand them. We have been to Europe to study them with a view to learning what would best serve the Irish people. We are sharing that information with the Department. We are having some success in sharing those views and, perhaps, changing some of the views that may exist.

I now turn to the future in relation to competition. Bus Éireann went into business in 1987 and immediately faced significant competition, which it has continued to meet ever since. In response to the question as to whether competition will be introduced, the answer is that it is already there. We do not have a problem with it if it is operated on a level playing field. Unfortunately, some of the competition operates in such a way - cherry-picking has been mentioned - as to constitute unfair competition, which we would like to see taken out.

Is it not the case that the Steer Davies Gleave report would remove competition, whereby one operator would get the inter-city service on, for example, the Dublin-Galway route on which there are currently three operators? That would be reduced to one, under the expressway flag.

Mr. Lilley

Yes. We have looked at relevant regimes abroad. In one country we visited, the people concerned were astonished that there was more than one operator on any route. They just could not understand it and said it did not make sense. That type of competition reduces efficiency. We have had instances of people coming into the market and engaging in cherry-picking and head-running. They may gain some market share and the customer may benefit temporarily. However, at the end of the day, what happens, as we have seen elsewhere, is that one operator will go out of business, leaving one operator whose modus operandi is different to that of the previous incumbent and detrimental to the interests of the consumer. However, that is a matter which everybody has to take into account and certain conclusions will need to be drawn.

There is competition on the Galway service at present.

Mr Lilley

We introduced an hourly service in Galway in 1998 and that certainly increased the market. It is a high quality service, which was reflected in the operation of one of the other operators in that market, which also improved its quality. That operator has now been taken over by a multinational.

There is more competition.

Mr. Lilley

No, there is not any more competition - that was already there.

Perhaps, but it has improved the service.

Mr. Lilley

I would not agree that Burkes' service has improved at all; both it and Citylink were excellent services.

Is it not true that competition has improved the overall service?

Mr. Lilley

Yes, we improved the service overall, in competing with the two existing incumbents. We were the ones who introduced the hourly, clock-face service. We upgraded the fleet.

The consumer does not care who does it, as long as it is done.

Mr. Lilley

Well, it was done and I agree with that.

There are many more buses on that route today than there were five or six years ago.

Mr. Lilley

That would not necessarily be the case.

There are more services.

Mr. Lilley

Yes, there are more services. When we put in the services on the hourly basis - this is where efficiency and effectiveness come into play - we did not increase the number of vehicles. We were operating nine services per day, in each direction, with nine vehicles. We then proceeded to operate 13 services per day, in each direction, with nine vehicles. We needed a few extra drivers but the vehicles were then doing one round trip per day and, some, one additional single trip, thus achieving better utilisation of vehicles. That is the "trick" - I use the word guardedly - in looking at efficiency or better utilisation of the resource.

Deputy Shortall inquired as to the amount of the subvention. Our subvention is 18% of our income. The figure of €21 million which I mentioned relates to an income of €112 million. We do not include our income from schools services - that is a separate issue. Does the Deputy remember what the first question was?

It was with regard to licences.

Mr. Lilley

What was the question on licences?

How does the system operate and how many requests for licences have been turned down by the Department?

Mr. Lilley

The system operates on the basis that Bus Éireann advises the Department while private operators request a licence. We have to submit details of the services we provide or want to provide, including maps, timetables and so forth. The Department considers whether this would be in conflict with an already established service or an application already made. If an application already exists, time is allowed for that service to be put in. However, a number of licences have been issued which have not been operated. That can take some time to sort out.

Does the Department have any mechanism for overseeing this and ensuring that services are put in place when licences are granted?

Mr. Lilley

I know of one service for which a licence was issued when we were also looking to extend our services on that route. It took about six months before the Department was able to establish that the licence would not be operated. We were then granted sanction to put new services in. It held up the development of that route for some time.

Has Mr. Lilley a rough idea of the percentage of applications that would be turned down by the Department?

Mr. Lilley

We do not know what applications are received by the Department. In our case, a number of applications have been turned down. However, on the other side of the coin, I do not know how many applications from private operators have been turned down because we are not party to the information. At present, there are 23 Bus Éireann applications outstanding. Some of those will come through. Sanction came through on some in recent weeks. Nonetheless, while we would like them to be processed more quickly, it takes some time for the Department to check them out.

With regard to the regulator, we accept what we received the aspect of Steer Davies Gleave report which puts funding and traffic congestion much higher up the list than is the requirement for a regulator, as clearly stated in the report. Such things must come first and one has to know how matters will operate before one can define the role of the regulator. It will vary depending on the type of operation and the level of public funding required to serve those operations. The cost of traffic congestion, worked out by a private traffic consultancy on our behalf, in 2001 was €13 million and that figure increased to €18 million in 2002. This is simply a feature of the fact that we cannot operate at normal European speeds.

Calculations are made by considering the average speeds experienced across Europe and our own speeds, and these calculations are made across all our products, including Expressway, rural, city and suburban commuting. While it does not really affect the rural service because that operates in areas of low traffic congestion, there are problems with other areas such as Dublin, Limerick, Cork, Galway, and also in Waterford, though to a lesser extent in that city. Passengers should be able to travel from Dublin to Cork on a scheduled service in four and a half hours but that is very difficult generally, and impossible on a Friday evening. That adds an enormous cost to providing the service. If traffic congestion was reduced to European levels and if we could operate at normal European speeds, we would be able to operate the same level of services with 80 fewer buses and 100 fewer drivers. Those are the conclusions drawn.

Is that mainly because of the lack of bus priority?

Mr. Lilley

It is because of traffic congestion and lack of bus priority. We can improve the situation by getting more bus priority measures in place. At present, there are no bus priority measures outside Dublin. While we benefit from the Chapelizod bypass and the Lucan bypass, that is about it. Once one gets away from Dublin, there is nothing. Dublin Bus's problems start at Blanchardstown but Bus Éireann's start at Fairyhouse Cross. The traffic jam on the Navan Road is back to the County Bar in the morning and 15 to 20 of our vehicles are locked in traffic there.

I drove to Kildare recently for a meeting at 7.30 a.m. I counted seven Bus Éireann buses and a few contract vehicles in a traffic jam between Rathcoole and Kill. The jam is normally from the Naas bypass to the traffic lights at Kill but there was a traffic jam at Blackchurch that morning also, probably due to an accident. The journey time from Naas to Kill, a distance of two to three miles, in the morning is 40 minutes. It is a major problem which must be resolved. The first service which leaves Kells at 6.15 a.m. should get into Dublin at 7.30 a.m. or 7.40 a.m. and go out again at 9.15 a.m. to bring the next service back. We are lucky if the 11 a.m. service is undertaken by that vehicle.

I was asked about Cavan services. As part of the national development plan, we introduced an enormous number of services in 2000. They had been planned from 1998, when the national development plan was first mooted, and 1999. We agreed all the reductions with the Department. They were originally to be introduced in May 2000 but were introduced in July because we had to purchase 156 vehicles over a six-month period and recruit more than 150 drivers just to put these services in place. At the same time, we extended the use of contractors under our change programme. Just the week before we went with our service a private operator began a service. Recently, some two and a half years later, we were instructed to remove both the 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. services as they contravened the service which came in at 6.30 am.

Is that still the situation?

Mr. Lilley

The private operator's service is still in place. We have been given leave to put the 7 a.m. service back in but not the 6 a.m. These are hourly services to provide for a particular market - the commuting market. We built the services to such a good extent, for example, the 7 a.m. service requires a relief vehicle because it is full by the time it gets to Virginia. An extra vehicle must be in place at Virginia to pick up all the people there, despite the fact that there is a 6 a.m. service from a private operator.

I do not understand how Bus Éireann can be told to stop a service in favour of a private operator where it has agreed a new service under the NDP.

Mr. Lilley

We have difficulty with that. The private operator put the service in four days ahead of Bus Éireann starting its service. The debate has been about the initiation of the service. We initiated that service and advised the Department during 1999. However, a licence was issued in early 2000 for that operator to go in. It is a very difficult decision to understand.

I presume it was the same individual in the Department who granted the second licence in the knowledge that Bus Éireann had already got a licence. Different people deal with different operations.

Mr. Lilley

There are many people in the Department. We advised the Department of our intentions and we have subsequently been precluded from continuing the service. I do not wish to repeat myself, as I think I used the term "bizarre" previously, but it seems a little bizarre that this can happen, but it did.

Meanwhile the travelling public in County Cavan are losing out.

Mr. Lilley

Yes.

I was also asked about the percentage of routes. All of our expressway business is profitable - we would not run it otherwise as it is a commercial operation. Some of the city services are profitable. Peak hour services are loss-making when there is congestion. We are trying to increase usage during the day. If one needs three vehicles to provide services in the morning but only one in the middle of the day, one has an under-utilised facility. We have been attempting, with some success, to build up the off-peak business during the day. Some vehicles on particular corridors are profitable but others are not. Costs are attracted to the bus business by the bus itself. One has to have a driver to drive the bus, but the bus attracts the costs. If one does not use the bus and does not get the throughput in the way one needs, one has an inefficient or a loss-making operation.

The profits from those routes are obviously ploughed back in to the non-profitable social routes.

Mr. Lilley

Yes.

This element will be missing after privatisation.

Mr. Lilley

We always cross-subsidise. The money that has been made from the profitable elements since Bus Éireann was established in 1987 has been used to cross-subsidise. We are talking about a substantial amount of money, about €80 million?

Mr. Lilley

I was asked about competition with the rail company. The business grew tremendously when we introduced the hourly service on the Galway route. It was very encouraging that 30% of the growth resulted from car users. There was also some growth from rail users, but it was at a time when Iarnród Éireann was conducting development work on the track. There was little transfer from rail users; it is a separate business. We increased the business by attracting new users. We took a little share from our competitors.

Is it the case that other operators have pulled up their socks on the routes where competition was introduced?

Mr. Lilley

There is not any doubt that that is the case where people are operating alongside another business. We have the same quality of service and the same fares on the routes where there is no competition. Other people can come into the market and have done so. When we look at those with whom we are competing, we see some very good operators. We put ourselves among the good public transport operators. Some private operators are very good operators. While we are the dominant operator, we have always managed to hold our own against whatever form of competition has been introduced.

Do the same standards apply to private operators as to Bus Éireann? Is there any regulation of such businesses?

Mr. Lilley

There are standards. Obviously, we must operate under the Road Traffic Acts. Those standards must be applied. We certainly have a very extensive driver safety training programme for drivers. We were the first Irish company to become a member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists. Most of our drivers have gone through the training course and have qualified as members of the institute, which is a tremendous achievement in itself. It was reflected in the first year of our operation when we had a 30% reduction in collisions, despite a 15% increase in miles travelled.

Is there any independent monitoring of the speed of Bus Éireann buses? I have been overtaken by Bus Éireann buses on many occasions while travelling at 65 mph. This behaviour seems to be widespread. Is there any independent monitoring of speed?

Mr. Lilley

All Bus Éireann vehicles have governors on them.

Do they absolutely restrict speeds?

Mr. Lilley

That is the plan, yes. The governor is there to restrict the speed of the vehicle.

Does it restrict it to the actual speed limit?

Mr. Lilley

They cannot travel at more than 60 mph.

If I see Bus Éireann bus travelling at more than 60 mph——

Mr. Lilley

Ring me.

What is your number?

Mr. Lilley

If one sees a Bus Éireann bus travelling at more than 60 mph, it is probably trying to catch a private operator.

It is not a laughing matter.

Mr. Lilley

I agree.

There was a serious number of fatalities as a result of a coach accident at the weekend. My experience and that of a number of people to whom I have spoken about this issue is that Bus Éireann buses, as well as most coaches on inter-city journeys, regularly and consistently exceed the speed limit. I do not believe that governors on Bus Éireann buses restrict speeds to 60 mph, as it defies all the evidence I have seen. I spend a fair amount of time driving on national roads.

Mr. Lilley

The Deputy is correct when he speaks of the speeds of old vehicles. I have witnessed vehicles travelling at too fast a speed. We have made clear to our drivers during training that a driver who is caught for speeding is responsible. Drivers are conscious that a penalty system is now in place. Our timetables do not require our drivers to travel in excess of the speed limit.

Do the governors restrict buses to 60 mph?

Mr. Lilley

Yes.

With regard to competition law, the EU will force operators like Bus Éireann to give access to private operators. Busáras, for example, will have to open to private operators, who will probably have to pay for it. Has Bus Éireann looked at that? Will it allow private operators to use Busáras? Will it wait for the EU to force it to do it?

Mr. Lilley

Private operators who are sub-contracted to Bus Éireann use Busáras.

I know, but I am not talking about sub-contractors. I am talking about operators that are independent of Bus Éireann.

Mr. Lilley

There are two ways of looking at that. Busáras is operating above capacity and there is no room for anyone else. There is not even enough room for Bus Éireann. We are actually out on the street.

There may be other stations around the country.

Mr. Lilley

I would not like to move to Busáras if I had a nice bus stop on O'Connell Street in Dublin, where the people are.

Busáras might be a bad example, but the EU will force Bus Éireann to allow private operators to access bus stations around the country.

Mr. Lilley

That is not necessarily so. EU policy is a moveable feast and is moving quite rapidly.

I know.

Mr. Lilley

Germany is very much in favour of competition, which is spoken about at length, as long as it is not in Germany. They do not have competition in Germany. France is very much in favour of competition because its multinational companies are buying up other companies outside of France. They do not allow competition in France.

Yes, but the Commission will force Germany, France, Ireland and all other member states to allow private operators to have access to their facilities. It will do likewise in the cases of Dublin Bus, CIE and other companies, not only in relation to public transport, but in other matters such as ports.

Mr. Lilley

That may well become the case and we will have to deal with it if it does.

Would Bus Éireann think of doing it before it is forced to do it?

Mr. Lilley

Would you?

Bus Éireann will have to do it, so why not now? These measures will be introduced to improve the service for the travelling public. That is the idea behind it.

Mr. Lilley

Until such time as the regulatory regime is in place and the rules are clear, we cannot make a decision. We have invested significantly in our stations. People may say they have been paid for by the State, but I have just made the point that the investment in stations has been generated by the profitable expressway services which utilise them. If one looks at the situation elsewhere, Ireland is unique in that public transport did not grow through local authorities. It grew separately. Stations in Britain were owned by local authorities and opened to private operators to whom they were subsequently sold. Private operators sold the prime sites and moved elsewhere to the edges of cities and so forth. The operators used the funding generated to build their businesses and engage in competition. It is a totally different scenario. The answer to the question asked is that we will cross that bridge when we come to it.

When the shadow of Brussels falls over you.

Mr. Lilley

We accept that. The last point made concerned negotiations in Limerick tomorrow with local authorities, the National Roads Authority and a representative from the Department of the Environment and Local Government. Negotiations commenced in reality on this when the Cork land use and transportation study process was introduced in 1978. It is only in 2003 that we are getting any priority measures. We opened discussions in Limerick in 1998 and we are still hoping to get back to the table to ensure there is some movement. It has been very frustrating for Bus Éireann. When we look over our shoulder at Dublin Bus, we can see what has happened in the city while we have not been able to move anything along elsewhere.

The question I asked was slightly more detailed. Is Bus Éireann able to draw on international experience in this area? Have design consultants been asked to look at the issue in terms of the available space or potential traffic management problems? I presume delegates will go to the meeting in Limerick with something more than an aspiration which has not been checked out. I presume consultants and engineers have shown that it is feasible by virtue of international precedent.

Mr. Lilley

We have funded consultants in Limerick and we shared funding of consultants in Cork with the city's corporation to study the priority measures required.

My question refers more to the approach roads to Dublin where I live. I am quite sure there are problems in Limerick and Cork. The example Mr. Lilley referred to of the Kill section of the Kildare bypass concerns a very old dual carriageway which may not be the most appropriate to examine. On the newer dual carriageways, which are wider, how extensively will bus lanes be used? Is the Naas dual carriageway appropriate to get the seven buses out of the Kill traffic jam?

Mr. Lilley

The Deputy is correct. The quality of the hard shoulder there is not great at the moment and would need to be repaired. We secured the use of the hard shoulder from Blanchardstown shopping centre to the M50 by pushing and cajoling and, in fairness, Fingal County Council agreed. We cannot use the shoulder from the other side of the shopping centre because of the Kepak factory which has been in place for more than two years. We are totally frustrated.

Is there potential to use the hard shoulder on the M50?

Mr. Lilley

The M50 is not a bus route. When the port tunnel is open, we will be able to egress many of our services from Busáras through it to the M50 to exit Dublin rather than attempt to get through the city. That is certainly feasible.

What about the hard shoulder between Dublin and Navan?

Mr. Lilley

I am not aware. I have simply requested that hard shoulders be examined and used where feasible. The Secretary of Transport in the United Kingdom proposes that hard shoulders on motorways be used by any vehicle where there is congestion to provide more road space. Questions are brought up about the safety of doing this.

The hard shoulder is there for a reason, which means it is obviously not that safe.

Mr. Lilley

It is safe depending on what one uses it for. The hard shoulder is there to allow people to pull over if they break down. It is also used by emergency vehicles. Where there is no hard shoulder, emergency vehicles still get through as everybody just pulls over.

Would Mr. Lilley accept a lower speed limit on the hard shoulder?

Mr. Lilley

I would have no problem with that if it were necessary. In fact, I proposed a speed restriction during a recent informal discussion with a member of the National Roads Authority who voiced concerns about safety. I would much rather have buses travelling at 20 mph or 30 mph than at 2 mph. It makes sense.

Have the economic benefits of upgrading hard shoulders been examined given the financial constraints on other choices? Upgrading hard shoulders is much less expensive than some of the other solutions proposed.

Mr. Lilley

It is not our place to say what should be done. All we can do is explain that if we had the use of hard shoulders our service would be more effective. We would save money which would save the taxpayer money.

Has the company asked that a one-year pilot scheme be implemented such as the Dublin-Navan proposal rather than attempt to have this system introduced across the board? The NRA and the local authority might agree to one route.

Mr. Lilley

We would be very happy. All of these proposals will be put on the table tomorrow.

The committee should write to the NRA to ask it about this.

Long distance commuting routes have received much attention recently. Has Bus Éireann indicated any possible saving in journey times from Kildare, Meath and the outlying settlements now feeding into Dublin? Will that be part of the presentation to be given tomorrow?

Mr. Lilley

It is like Dr. Westwell's problem. When the section of hard shoulder from Blanchardstown to the M50 was made available to us, the average saving was 15 minutes at peak. That is only a short stretch. The example I always use is that of Trim from where the first service, which used to leave at 7.30 a.m., was scheduled to arrive at Busáras at 8.45 a.m. In the early 1990s it used to make it, but in later years it took longer and longer. By 1998, the earliest it was getting in was 9.45 a.m. We introduced a 7 a.m. service which was moved to 6.45 a.m. and then to 6.30 a.m. The costs come in at that point because one ends up carrying more people, but one has to provide three or four vehicles to get them to work on time. The time it takes those vehicles to make the journey means one gets only one trip out of them. They make only one trip in the evening also. The evening peak is more spread out, but the morning peak is a very tight window and we have to ensure we get people to Dublin. The numbers we bring into Dublin at peak has increased since 1998 from 3,500 to 6,500, but it is taking that much longer to transport them. If we could improve the journey time, we would carry far more people and there would be fewer cars on the road. That is the whole objective.

A number of communities have been looking for additional request bus stops on expressway routes. A stop is sought between Athlone and Ballinasloe where the population has increased dramatically over the past ten years, but we are not getting anywhere with it. What is the procedure involved? I can understand the failure to provide a compulsory stop as to do so would reduce the speed of journeys on the Dublin-Galway inter-city service.

Mr. Lilley

Hail stops operate only on what are termed "stage carriage services". Any other services require an approved stop. The Expressway services are not designed for stopping anywhere else as there are safety implications. The Garda Síochána has sole responsibility for determining the location of bus stops. While this responsibility is being transferred to local authorities, the Garda has, until now, had sole discretion in this regard. We cannot stop buses to pick up people on the side of the road.

Buses would stop to pick up people waiting at a stop.

Mr. Lilley

That depends on the service in question. Like the Deputy who has just left, I had to pull up sharply behind a private operator who pulled into the side of the road. Rather than take a route through a certain village, these operators use the bypass for speed. Stopping on a bend is a dangerous practice.

What were passenger numbers last year in comparison to, say, five years ago?

Dr. Westwell

Passenger numbers, which were about 132 million five years ago have increased by some 10%. These figures relate to overall time bands. As we stated, policies have been geared to peak periods which have shown dramatic increases. The increase last year over all time bands was 3.5%.

Does Dr. Westwell have passenger figures for last year?

Mr. Lilley

As we outlined in the presentation, road passenger numbers increased by 15% between 2000 and 2002, whereas figures for school transports have slipped slightly. To give a five year position, the increase has been about the same - 15% - since 1997 or 1998. From memory, the figure in 1997 was about 37 million. The increases in passenger numbers have, therefore, been substantial. The British Government's target for bus passenger increases for the ten years from 2001 to 2011 is 1% per annum across the board.

On behalf of the committee, I thank Dr. Westwell, Mr. Lilley and their staff for taking the time to come before us and enlighten us on this important issue. It has been an informative and interesting meeting.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.05 p.m. sine die.
Barr
Roinn