JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Nov 2003

Vol. 1 No. 29

Railway Procurement Agency: Presentation.

Chairman

I welcome Mr. Frank Allen, chief executive officer of the Railway Procurement Agency; Mr. Michael Sheedy and Mr. Ger Hannon.

I wish to draw to the attention of the delegation the fact that members of this committee have absolute privilege but the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. I remind members of the 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 or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I thank Mr. Allen for his invitation to visit the depot. We will try to organise a suitable date.

Mr. Frank Allen

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it. The 25 kilometres of light rail from Sandyford to St. Stephen's Green and from Tallaght to Connolly Station, which are now in the last stages of heavy construction, will make an appreciable difference to the levels of congestion in the corridors that are served. The project is being implemented under light rail orders and the cost of implementing it is on a par with the cost per kilometre of similar schemes in France and the UK.

There is tangible evidence of the difference the light rail system will make when it is implemented next summer. At present, travel in the corridor from Sandyford Industrial Estate to St. Stephen's Green during the morning peak time is conducted at five miles per hour. It is the busiest corridor in the city. When Luas begins commercial operations, it will offer a 22 minute service from Sandyford Industrial Estate to St. Stephen's Green. It will be a high capacity, comfortable, affordable and reliable service. We believe it will make a significant difference to congestion in the corridor served.

Building a light rail scheme such as this in an old city and serving some areas of dense population is disruptive. This is unavoidable. We sincerely apologise for and regret the inconvenience caused to residences, businesses and commuters. In everything we do we seek to minimise the disruption caused. The issues that are a matter of appropriate public concern in Dublin at present were of similar concern in various French cities that have light rail schemes. However, immediately following the commencement of operation of those schemes there were calls from residents and businesses for extensions to them. Those extensions have now been built and in the subsequent phases were not at all controversial. People recognised that urban renewal and a reduction in congestion were the results of a top class light rail system, such as the one we are implementing.

We acknowledge the frustration of residents and businesses, particularly of people in the Harcourt Street area and from Benburb Street to Abbey Street. They have been particularly annoyed by the extent of the disruption. Outside of those areas there have been issues with disruption but not of such magnitude. The committee members will have questions about specific locations but I will take this opportunity to mention some of the regular criticisms we have heard and to address them. Committee members will probably have other questions afterwards.

There is criticism that the Luas works caused the street to be dug up and reinstated several times. There are also criticisms that work sites have been left unattended for several days in a row. The first point about repeated digging up and reinstatement of the street is true. It is part of the construction process to take care of the utilities at the beginning. Unfortunately, there are many different utility companies. In an ideal world, each of the companies, such as ESB, Bord Gáis, Eircom, Dublin City Council and so forth, would be there at the same time. We have endeavoured to co-ordinate all of them but often our priorities are not their priorities and we cannot compel them to be there at a certain time when we need them. There were instances when we could not do that and streets have been excavated, reinstated and excavated again. It was part of the design process that the utilities would be dealt with separately and then the main infrastructure, such as putting in track and so forth, would be dealt with. That was the plan and that is what has happened. We accept that it has caused frustration for people but that is how light rail is built in city streets under which there are major utilities which have to be maintained.

The criticism of the streets being left unattended is fair. Some of it is due to the point I mentioned earlier, that our priorities are not always the priorities of the utilities and there is no easy way to compel the utilities to be there at the time they are required. Beyond that, one of our major issues for a contractor is that when they open a street, they should get the job done and completed. However, we accept there has been reasonable criticism of delays in reinstating a street when it has been opened.

Another criticism we frequently hear is that the RPA has not communicated adequately with local residents and businesses. We do not accept this. We have hosted or attended more than 2,000 public meetings. We have a database and we communicate regularly with more than 7,000 people. We have weekly meetings in areas of particular concern. In the Henry Street and Mary Street area, for example, we have 7.30 a.m. meetings every Friday with Henry Street/Mary Street Partnership and with the DCBA to discuss their concerns. If people have concerns, we are available and will bring along the contractor at 7.30 a.m. on a Friday to discuss them. We had local liaison committee meetings but those meetings have petered out somewhat because people did not attend them. However, we are available for them. People have also made the criticism that we have not been sufficiently responsive and we have to accept that they believe that. However, we believe we have made a tremendous effort to communicate effectively.

There is criticism that the project has been ongoing for much longer than anticipated. It does appear that Luas work has been going on forever but much of that relates to the period before construction started. The disruption to businesses and residents has certainly gone on for longer than anticipated at the time of the public inquiry, to the extent of 12 to 14 weeks. The other delays were in the period before full powers were granted or where our contractor was slower than the design anticipated. However, in terms of construction on the street and how long the heavy work has been taking place, it is 12 to 14 weeks longer than announced at the time of the public inquiry.

The RPA has begun a retrospective consideration of Luas implementation to see what went well and what went poorly and, if there are Luas extensions, for which we believe there will be a demand, to look at how we would do it differently the next time. We will carry out a retrospective cost-benefit analysis, a retrospective environmental impact statement and a review of the contractual structure we put in place. We have a design build contract with our main contractors, which gives the contractor a certain freedom and flexibility in the timing for doing various things. This was put in place because it was believed that giving them responsibility to do things transferred risk to the contractor and offered value for money for the State. The retrospective analysis we have begun will look again at this type of contractual structure and consider whether it is appropriate, taking into account the external impact on third parties. That work has begun but it will take time. We need to wait until the operation starts to carry out a cost-benefit analysis because we must wait to see the actual level of patronage and outturn. However, that work is important and we are taking care of it.

We acknowledge the frustration of city centre traders and residents. The disruptive heavy civil works will be substantially completed by the end of the year. We will observe Operation Freeflow, as we have done every other year. The work that will take place in the new year is largely related to overhead poles, attaching wires to buildings and so forth. It is technical and complex work but is not particularly disruptive to business. The disruptive work is substantially behind us. For the people who have had to put up with it for an extended period, the compensation will be that next summer there will be up to 8,000 people per hour travelling on a light rail vehicle which can stop at a stop within a few hundred metres of their front door. The experience internationally has been that the frustration people have suffered during the implementation process has been more than compensated for by the tremendous urban renewal benefits and increases in business that have taken place as a result. All our efforts are dedicated to ensuring that the system is in place by next summer. We believe it will be well worth it.

We will be happy to answer the committee members' questions and we look forward to meeting the committee at its convenience at a depot. If other specific questions arise outside the meeting, we are available to answer them.

Chairman

Listening to Mr. Allen, the process sounds reasonable. However, we have talked to people who have been affected by this and they would not concur with what he said. They do not believe that they have been properly informed. We visited Benburb Street and one man told us that his trade was down by 80%. In other cases it was down by 50%. The people pointed to businesses which had closed.

Nobody for a minute believes that the Luas will not work. In fact, I believe its biggest problem will be that it will be too successful because too many people will be trying to get on it. In the meantime, however, we cannot justify the disruption that has taken place. There is huge frustration. I took part in a radio station programme on which one of the members of the Dublin City Business Association said that heads should roll because of this. I disagreed and said it would be crazy to start something again. Mr. Allen has mentioned groups the RPA is talking to every week but they do not feel Mr. Allen is talking to them; they feel frustrated by it.

Mr. Allen

I agree that there is a level of frustration and, on specific points, people contact me personally. In some cases, I agree with them and explain that we are doing our best to get our contractors to get their act together and deal with those matters. On other issues, there is no answer. People want us to do specific things which we are not in a position to do without incurring considerable costs or while remaining within the provisions of the light rail order. When people complain about a lack of communication, often the issue is that there has been communication but we have refused to do something because the cost or other implications are greater than we can bear and people are frustrated by that. We are not underestimating the extent of the frustration and it is sincerely felt by the people concerned.

However, when walking down Benburb Street and the other streets, one can see the urban renewal that is already under way and the condition of the streets, although it is not yet completed——

Chairman

Mr. Allen is not minimising the disruption. There is a pub on the street and work is taking place on both sides of it. Why not work on just one side so people can get in an out of the pub rather than closing it off? These are simple things. I have been saying for some time that there is a lack of management of what is happening on the streets. There is nobody seeking to minimise the disruption to a pub or business.

Mr. Allen

It is one of the issues we will look at in the analysis. We said to people at public inquiries that access would be maintained to every business all the time. People say the level of access is inadequate. It is difficult to have a trench dug in the street outside and maintain that access.

Chairman

It is around the corner as well.

Deputy Naughten

We received correspondence from AMB, the contractors who are carrying out the work. They stated in the correspondence that the RPA constantly monitors the project and the day-to-day status of the works. Perhaps Mr. Allen would elaborate on this. It is the nub of the issue as far as the committee is concerned. When we went to Queen Street and Benburb Street, we asked some of the staff on site who was in charge, but they could not give us an answer. There does not seem to be anyone in charge, which means the quality of the work is not up to the standard it should be. We saw gullies full of concrete, which means they cannot be used for their purpose. I saw last Saturday that someone had put in a manhole within 100 yards of the junction between Davitt Road and the inbound section of the N7 and had covered the metal line for the Luas with tarmacadam. It is obvious that employee did not care whether the Luas is operational. That standard of work highlights the fact that no one is supervising the site on a daily basis. Perhaps Mr. Allen could elaborate on that.

Will Mr. Allen comment on the ESRI report which states that an estimate was not carried out of the cost of disruption to businesses when the work was being done? Will he also comment on who is supervising the work? I am aware a French company carried out supervision on behalf of the RPA, but I understand it does not have such a contract any longer. Will Mr. Allen elaborate on that?

Deputy Shortall

Mr. Allen's performance this morning is disappointing in so far as he did not indicate any empathy with the difficulties business people face during construction. He spoke from a theoretical perspective when he mentioned the experience in other countries. I am certain the experience in other countries is different from the experience here. I cannot imagine a situation where the type of work practices and sloppy site management we witnessed in Queen Street and Benburb Street would be tolerated anywhere else. What we saw in Queen Street is a replication of what we saw in Middle Abbey Street over a long period and in Harcourt Street.

Mr. Allen has 120 staff in the RPA. Perhaps he could tell us about the supervision and management of the Luas contract. How many people are involved in that and what, if any, hands-on involvement do they have in the project? When we were there the other day, I spoke to four people working on the site. However, not one of them could speak English. I approached a fifth person who spoke English, but he ran away when I started asking questions. There was no one in charge at supervisory level.

It is clear from speaking to the business people that no one has been in charge from the perspective of the RPA over a long period. The work has been ongoing for almost four years. Intensive work has been done since last Easter. The business people were not told by the RPA about when the work would start or when it was due to finish. There has been little or no communication with the people most affected in that area other than an occasional letter. That is not good enough. Mr. Allen's statement that he has regular meetings with the Henry Street and Mary Street traders is not of any relevance to the issue before us today. What exact communication has the RPA had with the traders in Queen Street and Benburb Street during the construction work?

I am seriously concerned about the standard of the site in that area. Other members referred to that. There is one area where the ground has been excavated immediately outside and underneath a pub. There is a massive hole filled with rubble and debris, a pick, a saw and a shovel. One wonders if anyone is in charge from the point of view of the contractor and the RPA, which is the agency charged with ensuring this happens properly. What staff is involved in monitoring the project and in communicating with the people most affected? It is cold comfort for Mr. Allen to say today that business will increase once the line is up and running. However, several businesses have not survived that long because they have been run out of business. Several premises are closed in Queen Street and Benburb Street. There may be others which are big enough to survive to the end of this and which might get benefits afterwards. However, several businesses have not survived because access has been cut off. Has the RPA included any figure for compensation for businesses which have proven losses as a result of this activity? Can Mr. Allen give us a date for when the work will be finished in Benburb Street and Queen Street?

Deputy P. Power

I thank Mr. Allen and his colleagues for attending the meeting today. I was not in a position to join the delegation to see the work being done, but I accept everything that was said about it. When will fare paying passengers be using the Luas next year? Could Mr. Allen describe the contractual relationship with AMB Joint Venture and the terms of the monitoring set out in that contract? I presume the RPA would not have any difficulty with the committee speaking to AMB Joint Venture about the difficulties being experienced because it is in charge of that.

I welcome what Mr. Allen said about a retrospective cost-benefit analysis and EIS retrospective analysis. That is worthwhile. However, is it fair to say that the public profile campaign, undertaken by Mr. Allen's predecessor, did not sufficiently alert businesses or the general public to the exact level of disruption? Perhaps, because I am a representative from outside Dublin that did not impinge on my consciousness as much as it did on that of others. What lessons has Mr. Allen and the organisation learned from their dealings with the utility companies about how to reduce the level of disruption?

Mr. Allen

I will answer some of the questions, but I will ask Mr. Michael Sheedy, who has been the project director for Luas from the beginning, and Mr. Ger Hannon, who has been the front contact with the public, both residents and businesses, to also respond. On contact with the public, everyone in the management team meets representatives of businesses and residents all the time.

There is a theme running through Deputy Naughten's questions about the adequacy of supervision and what we are doing about it. Deputy Peter Power mentioned contractor responsibility. The RPA has a range of contracts with various contractors. We had direct contracts with McCloskeys, Clonmel Enterprises Limited and others for the enabling preliminary work which I believe people felt went well. There were smaller contracts at that stage and they proceeded on schedule. The degree of complexity regarding utilities was far greater than had been anticipated but that did not have major consequences in terms of disruption on the streets.It was a much more complex task which costmore money to complete. It did not, however, have a major impact at that earlier stage of the works.

The RPA has a contract for approximately 40% of the project with a contractor - AMB Joint Venture - which is made up of separate companies, some specialising in civil works with others specialising in the electrical and mechanism side. On the nature of the contract, it has responsibility to deliver the project according to specified quality standards. There has been criticism of the work. It has been said that work was done but people came back and dug it up. The reason was that we were dissatisfied with some of the work done and required it to be redone. There is a great deal of supervision.

The responsibility for the supervision of workers on site is that of the contractor. That is the nature of the contract we have. We do not employ track laying crews directly. AMB Joint Venture employs them directly and it is responsible for supervising them. On top of that, we have employees carrying out supervision from a quality point of view and ensuring adequate standards are maintained. Supervisors are on the street all the time; I never see them in theoffice.

Mr. Michael Sheedy

There are 25 supervisors on the street and there is a backup of approximately 15 more in the office.

Chairman

They are not looking for quality but at how the works are coming along.

Mr. Sheedy

They are managing the contracts and certifying payments, etc.

Chairman

That does not answer DeputyShortall's question.

Mr. Allen

I will come to that.

We have people on the street. When traders contact me to say I do not spend enough time dealing with queries, my response sometimes is that there are people who can deal with them better than I can, including Tom Gallagher who is on the street all the time and understands the technicality of access to businesses and so on. He can manage those queries much better than I can because his skill is in managing them. We have people on the street all the time.

On the question of whether the RPA is satisfied with the quality of the supervision, I should like to say that an issue which we continue to discuss with the contractor and challenge it about is the adequacy of the supervision. The criticism of the supervision has some basis. We try to supplement that supervision by having our people on the street but the contractor is responsible for it. We have safety staff who are on the street all the time to ensure the work site is safe from the point of view of pedestrians and others. We continue to have issues which we bring to the attention of the contractor and require it to remedy. That is an ongoing process. The immediate responsibility for site supervision is the responsibility of the contractor.

Chairman

Is it adequate?

Mr. Allen

We have had issues with it.

Deputy Shortall

What action has the RPA taken?

Mr. Allen

There is a choice of actions available to us in a contract such as this, and in most complex contracts. We have constant discussions and meetings at all levels of the construction joint venture and we bring to the contractors' attention those issues and ask it to do better. Alternatively, we could instruct people to do things in a different way. Under a contract such as this, one can instruct the contractor to do things in a different way but one pays a lot more money for that. Our approach is to bring to the contractors' attention the inadequacies there, to the extent we can, and to encourage it to remedy them. For example, at the Friday morning meetings we have with the Dublin City Business Association in Henry Street and Mary Street, issues are brought to our attention. We bring the contractors' representatives to those meetings. That has worked reasonably well. When the contractor has been challenged about specific issues, including access to a loading bay in a particular store, it has responded to it. It is a constant process for us to try to bring issues to the attention of the contractor and to force it to do things without displacing it as the responsible party because, ultimately, it is obliged to deliver an infrastructure which performs according to certain standards.

On the extent to which we get involved in micro-managing that, if the infrastructure does not perform according to those required standards, there is a risk, or a real likelihood, that the contractor will say that if we had allowed it to manage it in the way it proposed, that would not have happened. There is a contractual issue as to the extent to which one can instruct people and then retain some of the other controls in the contract about requiring the performance standards.

I will now try to deal with Deputy Naughten's questions in sequence. I hope I have dealt with the issue of who is in charge.

Deputy Shortall

Mr. Allen has not. How can the RPA have 25 supervisors, plus safety staff, and have sites in the condition that Queen Street and Benburb Street are in?

Deputy Ellis

Have payments been stopped due to lack of safety on any of the sites or lack of proper quality control?

Mr. Allen

In the case of safety, for example, we have closed down particular locations——

Deputy Ellis

Has the RPA stopped any payments to any of the contractors?

Mr. Allen

Closing down a particular site stops payment.

Deputy Ellis

Had the RPA paid the contractors for whatever was done?

Mr. Allen

We pay them on measured performance.

Deputy Ellis

How many sites has the RPA closed down since this project started and for what reason? Will Mr. Allen give us a list of them? I do not expect that list today.

Chairman

Deputy Ellis, you can speak later. Other members are waiting to speak.

Deputy Ellis

What is being said is waffle.

Chairman

The Deputy can make that point when he speaks.

Mr. Allen

I return to Deputy Naughten's questions. I am not quite sure of the detail of what happened on Davitt Road on Saturday.

Deputy Naughten

There are 25 supervisors in the RPA. Anybody with two eyes in their head who came in from the Red Cow roundabout last Saturday evening would have seen what happened. What was done was a disgrace. It was a small incident but it highlighted the lack of any quality or supervision. Staff carrying out the work do not have standards or respect for the quality of work they are doing given what happened there.

Mr. Allen

On quality, the contractor is not paid until work of the required quality is completed. Where we are dissatisfied with the quality, the contractor does not get paid. That means either remedying the work or redoing it. In any contractual situation, if one is dissatisfied with quality, one's main control is not to pay the contractor. On a regular and consistent basis, where we are dissatisfied and believe quality does not meet the required standards, we do not pay the contractor. That is the main control one has over a contractor in a contractual relationship such as this one.

Deputy Naughten

If there had been a road traffic accident there last Saturday, who would have been responsible?

Mr. Allen

I do not know the circumstances of last Saturday. Our contractor is responsible for safety and for ensuring that the work site is of a standard that it does not cause a traffic accident. If something the contractor did caused a traffic accident, it would be responsible. We have responsibility to supervise that, which we do. We have safety staff who travel the line constantly. If we identify inadequacies, we stop payments and close sites to ensure the problems are resolved.

The ESRI report, which Deputy Naughten mentioned, stated that there was not an estimate of the cost of disruption and the cost to business which is correct. An argument could be made that when looking at a project in the future, one would ask about the impact on businesses. One would also have to ask about the consequential benefit to businesses in the longer term from a much improved public transport system serving the neighbourhood. On the longer-term benefits, and without taking from the major disruption caused during the construction period, having 8,000 people potentially getting off at a tram stop within a hundred meters of one's door is a considerable benefit and would have to be taken into account in the overall checks and balances assessment of whether this makes sense.

Deputy Naughten asked about Semaly, the company that acted as design consultants at an earlier stage on behalf of the RPA. Their work was completed. We have not contracted out the sort of provision the Deputy speaks about. Their work came to an end and we do not retain design consultants because our design work is complete.

Deputy Shortall said that we showed no empathy whatsoever, but that is not the case. We sincerely apologise to people for the extent of the disruption that has been caused. We have endeavoured to try to minimise that. Putting in a light rail scheme is inevitably a disruptive process but we certainly do sympathise with people, particularly small businesses where short-term cash flow is a major consideration. The focus of concern is more on the short-term than the long-term. We certainly do sympathise with people, but the only way to address those concerns is to get the work done as quickly as possible, and we will come in a moment to——

Deputy Shortall

Another way is to manage it properly.

Mr. Allen

Yes, indeed.

Deputy Shortall

That is clearly not being done at present.

Mr. Allen

I would not accept that.

Deputy Shortall

Is Mr. Allen accepting any of our criticisms? If the RPA is coming in with a closed mind and is not prepared to accept criticism we are all wasting our time.

Mr. Allen

Earlier in our presentation I said that the whole purpose of looking at how we went about this and at what went well and what went poorly is to recognise and acknowledge that some things could have been done better, particularly regarding communication with people. We genuinely believed that having 2,000 public meetings and various other things would be sufficient but that is clearly not the view of local residents and businesses. We have to accept that. We probably took the view that we were doing far more than any other utility company in putting in new utilities and that our efforts would be sufficient. We have to accept that the public do not accept that to be the case. I accept that there have been issues, and I have mentioned that there are issues regarding cycling. I am not rejecting out of hand everything——

Deputy Shortall

What is the RPA going to do to improve that situation?

Mr. Allen

We are managing the situation on a day-to-day basis. At an earlier stage we did not have weekly meetings with local businesses. People contacted us and we, in turn, wrote or spoke to the contractor. That was not effective so we decided to have weekly meetings with critical businesses, allow them to put points to the contractor and ask them to come back the following Friday to say what had been done about it. That has yielded results. We have a good working relationship with the Henry Street/Mary Street Partnership and the DCBA.

Chairman

What can I say, but I was on a radio programme on which one individual said that people should be fired. I did not agree with that person but that is what he said, so the relationship is obviously not as good as Mr. Allen feels.

Mr. Allen

I acknowledge that, because so many people say there is inadequate communication and I cannot challenge that. What we believed would be sufficient clearly has not been. On a week-to-week basis we have regular contact with those representative bodies. Mr. Hannon attends more meetings than I, but I attend meetings with those bodies and I believe we have a good working relationship with them. I did not hear the radio programme referred to but if that is what the man said I am surprised. I ask Mr. Hannon to speak about work in Benburb Street/Queen Street, the schedule and when the contractor will be out of there and so forth.

Mr. Ger Hannon

At present we are in the very last phases. Most of the work between Queen Street and Liffey Street west is essentially about upgrading footpaths with new granite pavements and curbs. There is one stretch of imprinted concrete surface about 20 metres long from Queen Street corners and McGettigans pub back up towards Edmonson Electrical. If one goes up to Blackhall Place as far as the museum, about one third of the actual roadway, the moving traffic lanes, one will see that work is at an advanced stage of preparation for laying the final wearing course.

On communications with people down there, prior to starting the current phase focusing on track work and reinstating, we issued letters to people to tell them that the phase was starting and what it was about. Apart from local liaison committee meetings which, as Mr. Allen, mentioned are not very popular, we arranged an interesting set of meetings for frontages broken down by section along the city centre area to explain to them what was involved in the first and second phase of works. In many instances we actually painted a bleaker picture in terms of the extent of the sites and so on but I will come back to that in a moment.

We prompt people in those letters to engage in consultation. It is a two way process and it only really works when people treat it as such. Bear in mind that when one issues a letter like that at the start of a phase, details would not be given of precise sections or where exactly the fencing or concrete barriers would be, largely because the contractor must agree permits spelling out the extent of the site with Dublin City Council and the Garda. The main determinant in breaking down those sites is ensuring that residents, goods and customers can get in and out of premises. We prompt a two way flow.

On a day-to-day basis we have the efforts of our own public consultation team. As Mr. Allen said, that extends to people from the engineering, architectural and landscaping end, as well as management, who will always engage. Everybody in the RPA would see themselves as part of the team delivering a public transport project so nobody is shy about meeting the public.

Similarly, we work very closely with the liaison person on the AMB side, and between us, as issues arise. AMB, for instance, would deal directly with quite a number of people who have issues with truck movements and so on. There is a real need for technical involvement in terms of the turning template on the truck, where the barrier can go and so on.

By and large, people have been very reasonable with us. There is a general frustration and people have seen a lot of works at this stage. Sometimes it is no harm to remind people that it is very much in the final phases and is now about upgrading footpaths and putting in pedestrian crossing facilities and so on, which will be welcomed. Even in doing things like putting in footpaths and kerbs one walks into areas full of old chestnuts. Generally, there is not a premises that fronts onto a street anywhere in Dublin and that deals with goods that would not like to have a loading bay or parking facility directly outside its door with its name on it, but that is not possible and goes beyond our remit and area of responsibility.

However, I think some of those who voice criticisms of us would also accept that not only have we apologised for the inconvenience brought upon them but we have, time and again, gone the extra mile in engaging with the DCC and the Garda to sort out many of these old chestnuts. There are quite a number of them and if the committee wants specific details I would be happy to walk along a line, either physically or on paper, and show members some of the issues that have been resolved.

Our efforts are proactive and I do not think the problem is one of communication. In some instances it is the message. People do not like it when we tell them that we will have to dig up the street in front of their premises. People probably imagined that because we were co-ordinating amongst all the utility companies, we could somehow come along, dig a hole, put all the pipes and cables into it and fill it up. It does not work that way, despite our best efforts. It is probably the first time in the history of the greater Dublin area or anywhere in Ireland that somebody has taken on that sort of co-ordinating role amongst over ten utility entities who have been used to working in splendid isolation, some might say. There was a huge amount of work involved with huge spin off benefits attached. We will be criticised, but in time it will be recognised that a huge amount of work for the benefit of the city has been done.

Deputy P. Power

My question was whether the RPA really altered——

Chairman

Others want to ask questions also.

Deputy Shortall

I am not asking in general terms about the 2,000 meetings. I ask specifically what the RPA has done in regard to Benburb Street.

Mr. Hannon

Is the Deputy talking about this phase or both phases?

Deputy Shortall

Both. How many meetings took place with the business people there?

Mr. Hannon

It is very difficult to put a number on it but it is high. There is no one strong representative group in that area and there is a mixture of residents and businesses. Even amongst the businesses, some are purely retail and others handle goods. They all have very different requirements, and then there are apartment complexes and so on. In Benburb Street, as well as everywhere else, we printed large scale newspaper notices with a map showing people the——

Deputy Shortall

The business people told us they had never met with the RPA.

Mr. Hannon

Some individuals may not have met me, but I would be very hard pressed to name anyone between the Sean Heuston Bridge, say, and Smithfield who has not at least met one of us and is not in possession of at least two to three relevant mobile numbers.

Mr. Allen

We have not given Deputy Shortall an indication of the frequency of meetings. For some businesses we would meet people on a weekly basis and deal with detailed queries. It may not be myself or Mr. Hannon but could be site supervisors and others more familiar with the details of when works will be carried out. Those businesses say this is not sufficient, and sometimes they complain that we are not speaking to the right people and that we need to respond accordingly. However, the contact is that frequent. Can I——

Chairman

Other people are anxious to ask questions.

Mr. Allen

Deputy Shortall asked whether our budget had included any figure for compensation for business, to which the answer is "no." We do not have in our Government-approved budget any amount available to pay compensation for loss of business.

Turning to Deputy Power's question when the Luas will have its first fare-paying passengers, we and our contractors are targeting and have a work programme to achieve completion of the heavy duty civil work side at the end of 2003. Completion of the overhead poles, wires and so on to permit trial running is expected by the end of March 2004, and then there will be a running-in period to satisfy rail safety people, have further driver training and full integration to achieve passenger service on the Sandyford line by the end of June 2004. The corresponding dates for the Tallaght to Connolly line are to complete the system by June 2004 and have fare-paying passengers on board in August 2004.

Our contractors have a programme to achieve that and we are doing everything possible to adhere to it. All our efforts are dedicated to that. I spoke earlier about the contractual relationship with AMB. AMB told us on Friday that they had been contacted directly by the committee and they provided us with a copy of the letter they sent the committee. That is a matter between AMB and the committee.

We were asked whether, on reflection, we believe that we did not do enough to alert businesses as to the impact of the project. The answer is an obvious "yes," in that people clearly did not understand the extent to which it would be disruptive, so the message was not clear enough. So what could we have done?

To take an example, I recently had a meeting with a managing director of a company located on one of the routes and affected by the disruption, who complained that they had not been consulted. At a subsequent meeting, I took along some of my colleagues who had visited the boardroom of that company, laid out maps on the table, displayed mock-up drawings and explained in detail what would happen. Admittedly, this was some time previously, at the early stage of implementation. The managing director of this company acknowledged that had happened and that full information had been given, but said that they did not quite understand what the consequence would be until concrete was being poured outside their front door. It is a challenge for us to know how to go that extra step. It is not a question of willingness but of knowing what we can do beyond going to a company's boardroom, showing maps on the wall, providing full information and so on in order to bridge that gap so that when the concrete is being poured outside the door the company understands that this is what it is all about. We speak to people in other countries to see how they go about this——

Deputy P. Power

Has the RPA learnt lessons in that regard?

Mr. Allen

Without a doubt. We certainly learnt that much more needs to be done to communicate. We are absolutely committed in the future to better communication efforts. I cannot tell the committee what those efforts will be but clearly we did not communicate effectively in the past. People do not understand drawings, and once the concrete truck is outside the door it is too late to rectify this and people feel they have not been informed.

Deputy Power asked whether, in dealing with utilities, it is a huge issue to bring together all the different utilities and convince them that they need to do work this Tuesday afternoon, for example, if we are to open for service in June 2004. I do not know how we can do more. It might be a matter for critical infrastructure legislation to see whether some powers should be given to compel people to do that or maybe to give responsibility to somebody else. We cannot actually do the work ourselves. We can put in the infrastructure ducting and so forth but the utility companies must put in their own utilities.

We would love to be able to co-ordinate better. One example of how it worked very well was with Dublin City Council, partly because we had six or seven people from Dublin City Council sitting in our office all the time. They were almost part of our staff. Perhaps the best way forward is to ask the ESB to have six or seven people sitting in our office all the time so we can ask them to do this or that. That certainly must be improved in any major infrastructural project.

Deputy Glennon

I welcome Mr. Allen and his colleagues. We have been talking somewhat nebulously about overall issues and I would like to put some perspective on it. Last week a group of I think nine of us went down to Benburb Street/Queen Street and literally strolled onto the site. We spoke to local business people and asked the workers if we could see somebody in authority but there was nobody there. We strolled around, in and out of the site, for probably an hour or an hour and a quarter. I picked up a saw during that time, and no contractor or anybody in authority came forward to inquire about what we were doing or whether we needed assistance, not that we would have expected that.

What struck me most forcibly was the simple health and safety aspect of it. Here was a group of strangers who arrived unannounced and literally strolled in and out of the site. I was staggered that it was not only tolerated, but it did not seem to arouse the slightest hint of curiosity in any of the workers to whom we spoke. They were uninterested in our presence. I am interested to hear Mr. Allen's response tothat.

I would like the committee to be furnished with two specific pieces of information, if possible. What was the original date for completion of the Queen Street and Benburb Street segment of the line? What is the anticipated date for completion of that segment of the line? I note the comments about the lack of objection to AMB Joint Venture appearing before us. Would Mr. Allen encourage that company to appear here to discuss these issues with us?

Deputy Ellis

On the disruption being caused to people in Benburb Street and Queen Street as well as across the city, who is responsible for co-ordinating the necessary works? Is Mr. Hannon, the manager for strategic planning and public relations, responsible for it or is it someone else? Given what we saw last week, there does not seem to be any co-ordination. I support Deputy Glennon's comments. If someone else was running that site, he or she would be taken to court because health and safety regulations are being totally ignored. The conditions of the pavements, particularly outside McGettigans, are terrible. One cannot get into that premises without putting oneself at a severe risk. One could use the plywood, which is the only bridge into it. If the proprietor has to ask someone to leave the premises, what will happen in terms of public liability? That will have major consequences for the RPA or for the owner of the premises. The RPA and those who are working must take responsibility. It is a minefield.

Did Mr. Allen have any discussions with AMB Joint Venture about our request? He acknowledged he received our letter on Friday, but did he have any discussions with the company about whether he would allow it to attend this committee?

Senator Morrissey

From listening to some of the replies today, it is evident that there is either a flawed contract in place or there is a serious shortage of management skills. The delegation used words such as "convince" and "prompt" when speaking about getting discussions with people and convincing contractors. Mr. Hannon said they did well to co-ordinate the ten utility companies and to get them on time. That is the job of the RPA. The RPA is not employed to cause the disruption it has caused. The model mentioned this morning is not a business model, but a Civil Service one. It is as if we are not spending anyone's money. Some footpaths must be dug up and relaid because they were not done correctly. Have any sections of track to be relaid? Has the track which has been tested met the required performance standard or have difficulties been experienced? I was informed that a contractor spent four nights trying to put a tram on the tracks because it would not fit. Is that true? Mr. Allen seems to be surprised at that information.

On the hardship caused to businesses, can the delegation indicate whether it intends to prioritise certain key locations, such as Benburb Street? An audio shop at the end of Benburb Street has suffered great hardship. As Deputy Ellis said, plywood has been left over manholes outside shop doors. Is the RPA or the shop owner responsible for public liability? Has there been any discussion on that issue? Who is responsible for traffic management?

The lack of health and safety regulations on the site is mirrored in only one other European country, Portugal, where a person can walk on to a building site without wearing a hard hat. Tape is used around the site instead of proper barriers. There is not any supervisor and the men who work on the site do not wear hard hats. A similar situation exists here. I am not surprised that the contractor does not want to meet this committee. The RPA has a seriously flawed contract or it has a shortage of management skills. The RPA must address those issues for the business people present today and, more important, for the public representatives after what we witnessed last week.

Mr. Allen

I will deal first with the question about AMB Joint Venture and then I will ask Mr. Michael Sheedy to deal with some of the questions about co-ordination and civil works. AMB Joint Venture contacted us on Friday and told us it had received an invitation from the committee. We also received a message from the committee to say that such an invitation had been sent. We did not discourage or encourage it to attend.

Deputy Ellis

Did Mr. Allen discuss it with the company?

Chairman

The Deputy should allow Mr. Allen to answer the question.

Deputy Ellis

That is more crucial to this issue than anyone realises.

Chairman

The Deputy should allow Mr. Allen to answer the question first.

Deputy Ellis

I hope I can ask a supplementary question.

Mr. Allen

On the discussion, the company informed us it had been invited. I was surprised it had been invited because there was a session here in July when we were asked to discuss some of the issues about Connex in the UK. On that occasion, because we were not in a strong position to talk about what Connex was doing in the UK, we suggested to the committee that, perhaps, it might be useful to invite Connex to appear before the committee. However, we were told it would not be appropriate to invite a private company and that it was the responsibility of the RPA to answer such questions. I was surprised AMB Joint Venture had been invited. I told the company it was its decision whether it should attend. A representative told me it would seek its own advice. I was asked if it was obliged to attend and I said I did not know. I told the company we were accepting the invitation and that we were obliged to attend. I did not know the rules for the company. I suggested the company should seek its own advice because I could not answer the question. The representative told me it would contact the Construction Industry Federation. The next contact I had was yesterday when the contractor called me to say that a letter was being sent to say the company would not attend and that a copy would be sent to us, which we received. That was the extent of my discussions with AMB Joint Venture about its attendance at the meeting today.

Deputy Ellis

As the employer of AMB Joint Venture, will Mr. Allen ask it to appear before this committee to answer some of the questions on which he is hedging bets today? Mr. Allen should tell the company it does not have anything to hide and it should explain everything to the committee. Will Mr. Allen do that?

Mr. Allen

We are not hedging bets here. We have acknowledged that we have concerns about the various aspects to which the members referred. In our discussions with AMB Joint Venture about responding to public groups, residents, etc., we have always said we want to do it on a co-ordinated basis.

Deputy Ellis

Mr. Allen ——

Chairman

The Deputy should allow Mr. Allen to finish.

Deputy Ellis

Mr. Allen is not answering a straight question. Will Mr. Allen ask AMB Joint Venture to appear before the committee?

Chairman

The Deputy should allow Mr. Allen to answer.

Deputy Ellis

I want a straight answer - yes or no.

Mr. Allen

Our approach to our discussions with AMB Joint Venture has always been to ensure that if it tells Easons or Marks and Spencer something, we are aware of it. Our approach is to ensure there is a consistent message to residents and businesses. We should not be telling people one thing and others telling them something else. This has worked reasonably well. We invite them to meetings at which we are also present.

On the attendance of AMB, we have no powers to compel them to appear here. We will convey to them the wishes of members of the committee, and we do not object to their attendance.

Deputy Ellis

Will Mr. Allen write and ask them to attend the committee?

Mr. Allen

I will certainly write informing them that the committee has requested them to attend and we have no objection to their attendance. Perhaps Mr. Sheedy will answer the questions on the co-ordination of works, including the health and safety aspect.

Mr. Sheedy

From the point of view of authority, as project director I accept responsibility. The buck stops with me in that regard.

I will briefly explain the context of this contract. We have gone through the procurement directive to engage and retain AMB as a joint venture. It is an unincorporated joint venture. There are two parties involved in the joint venture, neither of which is supreme, which gives rise to some internal conflicts. This is the reality of life which we can do nothing about. We went through a public procurement process. This company was the preferred contractor when all the aspects were taken into account and we selected it. It is unincorporated and, as a result, there are tensions. Such is life and we can do nothing about it. Most projects of this nature are undertaken by a consortia or joint ventures. There are similar problems in regard to Dublin Port tunnel which is a joint venture.

We also have a design and build contractual arrangements with the company. If we got caught in the middle, we could be held to ransom in many areas as a result of not having resolved the issues. We leave many of the design issues to the contractor to resolve. One of the lessons learnt is that while that transfers some of the risk from the agency to the contractor, it causes other problems. Life is never black and white. One of the main issues has been the amount of interface required between the contractor under his design responsibility and various third parties, particularly local authorities. The Irish are best at managing themselves. It has given rise to severe difficulties which have caused design delays and frustrated and upset the programme. Those are the facts. It is not a black and white issue. There are benefits in design and build and there are down sides. Those are some of the down sides.

Deputy Glennon

Does Mr. Sheedy accept the health and safety situation, which we experienced last week, is acceptable in a contract of this type?

Mr. Sheedy

It is not ideal. Fortunately, we have had a fairly——

Deputy Glennon

I am aware it is not ideal. Is it acceptable to Mr. Sheedy as the official with overall responsibility for it?

Mr. Sheedy

I have problems with certain areas.

Deputy Glennon

Is the situation in which we found ourselves last week acceptable?

Mr. Sheedy

It is not fully acceptable. I would say in defence that the track record on accidents has been reasonably good, but we can never be complacent in that area. We are not dealing with a greenfield site or a very contained site. The site is 25 kilometres long. It cannot be isolated because of its geographical location. The city must continue to work.

Deputy Glennon

With respect, Mr. Sheedy, it works out at one supervisor per kilometre.

Mr. Sheedy

That is correct. On the first phase, the utility diversions, in Benburb Street and Queen Street, we were in and out virtually on time. There was a delay in starting into the track construction works. We eventually got into that area around the back end of last year and the spring of this year. We expect to be finished the substantial civil works, the disruptive works, before Christmas this year. We are actively working with the contractors to encourage them to get in and out of areas quickly.

I would like to refer to the way the contract is structured. Our objective at the beginning was to force the contractors to move into a specific area and finish it before moving on. They are penalised very significantly for not complying. One could say the contractor in the Benburb Street area would have carried out approximately 80% of the work and has just 50% of the money. He is suffering. We put that in as an incentive. However, I accept it is not having the desired effect. The fact that it is a very broad and expensive contract means we must be very careful. It is easy to condemn the contract but we have a very formal and comprehensive contractual arrangement. One cannot willy nilly decide to meddle and instruct because one would leave oneself very exposed to significant contractual claims. We are as frustrated as the public. I have sat in a car in St. Stephen's Green and seen people in front of me looking at the works - a hole opened and nothing happening - and I fully sympathise with them. I am as frustrated as they are, but it is very easy to say why not go in and instruct the contractor and tell him to get on with it.

The issue of holes in the street was raised. There are some practical difficulties. In the context of the utility diversions, it is not an easy problem. People do not know exactly what is in the ground or where it is. People say a hole was dug and everyone disappeared off site for days, or perhaps a week or two. We often find, having discovered a utility, that we need new connections to join the new to the old. These are specials that must either be fabricated or ordered from the UK, they are just not available. They are not in stock anywhere in the country. One does not know until one has dug the hole what one needs. Once one has found what is needed one must wait to get the part. People do not always fully appreciate or understand this, which adds to the sense of frustration.

In the context of some of the works in Benburb Street, we were frustrated with access to some of the area, but I do not want to go into any more detail.

Senator Morrissey

Why not go into more detail and tell us if that is the problem?

Mr. Sheedy

I am taking the Chairman's advice.

Chairman

We cannot refer to individuals by name. It is normal for me to read out this instruction.

Senator Morrissey

Is Mr. Sheedy saying that some of his difficulties arose because of access problems.

Mr. Allen

We have had difficulties in being allowed to progress along certain sections of the line. Some people have frustrated our efforts to progress. It would be inappropriate——

Chairman

Individuals have stopped this work?

Mr. Allen

Yes.

Mr. Sheedy

On Senator Morrissey's questions, sections of the work have been pulled out. Specific examples are under the bridge at Beresford Place, Middle Abbey Street outside Easons. Part of the track has been removed at Kingswood on the Tallaght line. I am not sure what the Senator is referring to about the track not fitting after four days' work - I have no idea what it is about. I suspect it is just a rumour which is unfounded. We are prioritising key locations. We are working very closely with Dublin City Council, the Garda, the traffic department of Dublin City Council in particular and Owen Keegan's office to co-ordinate the works and make sure Operation Freeflow works very well and to get out of all the critical junctions. Very detailed planning takes place on all the works at a pre-planning stage. The methodology for working through junctions and maintaining specified numbers of traffic lanes through junctions are all done by agreement in advance and carefully co-ordinated.

On the issue of insurance, there is project-wide insurance in place. We took out that policy and the premium has been paid by us. We spoke in great depth to insurance interests and specialists before the project began and we were advised that was the most efficient way of proceeding. When driving a company car one is not as careful as if one were driving one's own car because one knows the company will pay for ones misdemeanors. To overcome this we have held contractors responsible for the excess. Responsibility for incidents involving €10,000 to €20,000 must be carried by contractors. It is not covered by insurance. This puts manners on contractors. It is their responsibility to a large extent. If there are significant claims amounting to hundreds of thousands of euro it comes back to our project-wide policy. That has been the most efficient course and it is working out well. It is resulting in a fair level of discipline among contractors because they know it will hit them directly in their pocket. If contractors have no insurance cover for this eventuality it is a direct hit on their bottom line. I have covered most of the issues raised.

Mr. Allen

Senator Morrissey's first question referred to the contractual structure and whether it is a flawed contract. This is a complex issue in the sense that for major infrastructure projects, the practice in Ireland and internationally tends to move from the client - a local authority or a body such as the RPA - taking direct control over the day-to-day aspects of a project to one where those who know how to design, build and operate a system, such as this one, are not public agencies or local authorities but private companies which can do it much better. That takes us into the area of public-private partnerships. What we have is something in between - it is design and build. It transfers much of the risk in making sure the design and the build fit well together.

If we are to develop further lines, we will need to consider whether we continue to have a design, build approach. There are certain benefits to it in terms of transferring risk to the private contractors but there are limitations as well if we want to change some of the aspects of the project, and this was one of the key contributions of the ESRI report to which Deputy Naughten referred. One of the key reasons there are cost overruns is that the public agency signs a contract with a private party but the next week decides it wants to do something different. It is a joy to the contractor to discover its client wants something done differently because it can charge whatever it likes.

We have not reached a conclusion as to whether design, build is the appropriate way to proceed if we are to build extensions or otherwise. Part of the retrospective analysis we have now begun asks whether it takes fully into account some of the disruptions elsewhere. That was not adequately taken into account in terms of the decisions to begin with. In any subsequent projects we undertake, we will certainly take that into account.

Senator Morrissey also asked about traffic management and who takes responsibility for it. If we were not here this morning, we would be at a monthly meeting with the director of traffic of Dublin City Council, the most senior garda responsible for traffic, Dublin Bus, South Dublin County Council, and every other interested agency and contractor at which issues relating to traffic management are tabled and discussed. That process was introduced about a year ago and has proved to be effective. Dublin City Council is pleased with how it has worked out. In addition, there is some higher level dialogue with the key people dealing with strategic issues, including free flow and so on. We also have fortnightly meetings with the people involved, including the traffic management person for the contractor who tells us where vertical concrete barriers will go and how they will affect a bus stop in Abbey Street and so on.

Technically, it is the responsibility of the contractor to apply for what is called a T2 permit from Dublin City Council but we felt that was not working adequately. People were complaining about traffic management so I initiated a process to bring in everybody who had a concern about it. That has been working well. Dublin City Council would say it has helped significantly in terms of——

Chairman

When did that start?

Mr. Allen

About a year ago.

On health and safety, there is a head of safety in the RPA - a person who has 20 or more years' experience in rail safety in the UK. I walked the line with him about three weeks ago not to look at progress and works but to identify issues of health and safety. When we were out on the line, my colleague took guys aside and told them he was pulling them off. He has closed down individual work sites. There are issues of health and safety.

Deputy Glennon asked why there were not more barriers to keep people out. That is not required under health and safety regulations. In the later stages of an on-street construction project such as this and because it is, ultimately, an open system, it would be compliant with health and safety standards that people could walk in various locations. Holes in the ground are an entirely different matter. There are different regimes. As things stand in Benburb Street - that would comply with health and safety standards - one could walk along that street, unless there was a specific excavation, a hole in the ground into which one could fall.

Deputy Glennon

On a point of information, there is a hole in the ground.

Senator Dooley

I welcome the RPA. I will not be repetitive because my colleagues with whom I visited Benburb Street last week have more than adequately highlighted the difficulties and issues, particularly in terms of health and safety. Mr. Sheedy indicated that the situation there is not acceptable. Since the media interest in Benburb Street as a result of our visit there last week, what action has the RPA taken?

Mr. Sheedy

We have reviewed the matter with our safety manager, Ron Atkins, who, as Mr. Allen just said, goes to specific trouble spots with the contractors' representative and insists that certain matters are put right. That process is in place. Not only are we called out to hot spots but we do a regular review of the line. It is walked on a regular basis. We go out to see for ourselves if there are areas with which we are dissatisfied.

Senator Dooley

A process has started?

Mr. Sheedy

It has been in place all along.

Senator Dooley

On this specific hot spot, to use Mr. Sheedy's terminology, a process has begun, as a result of our visit to the site, between the RPA's safety officer and the contractor. I am not talking about contacts the RPA has with the contractor on an ongoing basis but about this specific issue which got media attention last week.

Mr. Sheedy

Mr. Ger Hannon has been in touch with our contractor as well because he has a working relationship with the public relations manager for AMB. These issues are highlighted on all fronts - it is not left specifically to the safety people. If necessary, I get directly involved and follow matters up with the project director for AMB.

Senator Dooley

As a result, has the RPA had any formal contacts with the people affected or those who have been identified as being affected by the problem on the corner of Benburb Street about which we talked?

Mr. Sheedy

I cannot say if they have been directly in contact with, presumably, the local residents and businesses.

Senator Dooley

Would anybody in the RPA group be able to identify——

Mr. Hannon

I am not sure.

Mr. Sheedy

I can find out, but I do not know off-hand.

Senator Dooley

On the penalties the RPA might impose on a contractor for the disruption and difficulties it might cause to traders in an area, who benefits from that compensation claw-back or that penalty?

Deputy M. Brady

How many safety officers does the RPA have? Does it have a liaison officer who liaises directly with businesses and understands the needs of business people, etc.? Is there a designated officer or officers with telephone numbers whom the public can telephone if they are affected by the construction of Luas? Senator Dooley mentioned something which would indicate that the RPA does not have such an officer or officers because all three RPA representatives said they did not know if anybody was in contact with the people affected since last week. That would indicate the RPA does not have a structure to deal with business people and people affected.

Senator Browne

I am baffled by the RPA's responses. It does not seem to realise that the main issue was not making business people aware of the disruption but rather the length of time involved and the fact the timetables which it gave to people were not adhered to. It does not seem to recognise that fact. Did the RPA originally plan to construct the Luas in 100 metre sections and, as it completed each section, to move on to the next one? If that was the case, why and when was that decision changed? With the benefit of hindsight was it a bad idea to change that decision? Should that model be followed in future?

I wish to ask about the Red Cow roundabout. Last week, Michael Egan of the NRA appeared before the committee and he said no additional Luas works were needed at the roundabout, which directly contradicts the view of the Minister and the RPA.

Chairman

That is not specific to this debate.

Senator Browne

But it is still relevant.

Chairman

I know but that is not why the RPA was invited to appear.

Senator Browne

It still relates to wasting taxpayers' money and people are interested in why the RPA is saying something totally different. Have efforts been made to ensure all the contractors, subcontractors and other workers on the Luas project are fully tax compliant and not in receipt of social welfare benefits from this or other jurisdictions? People of various nationalities are involved in the Luas works. Can the RPA verify this?

Deputy Eamon Ryan

Is the cost to the two lines under construction roughly comparable to similar lines in France and other continental locations? If so, could Mr. Allen outline examples? What are the agency's insurance and legal costs? Mr. Allen also stated if amendments are made to the contract, for whatever reason, that is manna from heaven for the operator, because it can profit from that. What were the causes of such changes? Was it traffic management or other issues? He said cryptically the agency had received legal submissions from private institutions and individuals on Benburb Street regarding access. Did they take legal action against the agency and force an amendment to the contract? While Mr. Allen does not wish to name institutions or individuals, the public should know whether the agency is subject to legal challenges to amend the contract, which is unfortunate for the taxpayer who must cover the costs.

Deputy Naughten

I refer to Mr. Allen's comment on the August deadline for the completion and opening of the Tallaght line. Will he clarify whether the warranty on the trams for that line will expire before they run?

Deputy Shortall

I refer to the lack of consideration by the RPA of members' concerns about health and safety issues. The delegation has hardly conceded there is a problem. The committee should refer the site on Benburb Street to the Health and Safety Authority, which is the independent body responsible for overseeing health and safety issues. I ask Mr. Hannon, on behalf of the committee, to meet the traders there within the next ten days.

Mr. Allen

Senator Dooley asked what happens to the money if a penalty is imposed and whether there is a pot of cash available somewhere. In contracts such as this the control one has to withhold payments is such that the contractor continues to do 80% of the work while receiving only 50% of the payments.

Senator Dooley

But, ultimately, the contractor gets paid.

Mr. Allen

He ultimately gets paid but there is provision for liquidated damages in the contract, which is a limited amount because that is governed by contract law as much as anything we can control in a contract. A certain amount would not be paid and payments would be withheld. There is a regime in place whereby, if quality is not demonstrated over various periods of time, payments are withheld. The objective is that we achieve the quality we require, not that we pay less. When that is achieved, we make the payment. It is delayed until the contractor gets it right. The cost to the contractor is that he must do more work to get it right. That is the penalty rather than us having a pot of cash.

Senator Dooley

I accept that but the reason I asked the question is, if an amount was retained, no matter how small, it could be used to alleviate the difficulties faced by traders in the areas affected.

Mr. Allen

We do not have a fund for that. Deputy Martin Brady asked how many health and safety officers we have. That department has four people. However, health and safety is the responsibility of everybody involved in site supervision and not only those who work in the department. To say we have four people in our health, safety and environment department probably underestimates the number. Our contractors are also obliged to have health and safety people on site. I do not know how many.

On liaison officers for businesses and whether people have telephone numbers, there is a freefone number, which is on all the signs around town and we get many calls every day on that number. There is a response to every freefone call.

Chairman

What is that number?

Mr. Hannon

The number is: 1 800 676464. Typically, if anyone calls us on that or contacts us on the website address, info@luas on health and safety, he or she immediately gets through to our health and safety people and the development contractor, AMB. Senator Morrissey referred to an issue involving a tram and a crane. That was raised by Senator Morrissey and by a resident in the area on one of our telephone lines. There was no substance to it. It involved a crane in the vicinity of the line and a stationary tram. Somebody using his or her imagination put it all together. That was a classic instance. That came in and was sent back.

The Senator referred to plywood. A similar issue came up approximately a week ago. It was reported back and we found that the plywood was covering a two inch hole and nothing deeper.

Mr. Allen

On the question about the number of liaison officers for businesses and residents, two people are dedicated to that. They walk the street. They went to Harcourt Street, knocked on every door and spoke to people about that. There are two full-time people. That does not include Mr. Hannon, Mr. Sheedy or myself who meet residents and business owners on a regular basis. There are two people whose whole-time occupation is to ensure every freefone call is responded to. We typically handle letters among ourselves.

Various members mentioned concerns raised during the visit to Benburb Street last week by the committees delegation. We read about the visit in the newspapers. If the committee would like us to attend the site with a delegation and notifies us in advance, we will be available to attend. If that is a means of answering questions there and then——

Chairman

The representatives cannot answer everything.

Mr. Sheedy

Members can call us every day.

Mr. Allen

I refer to Senator Browne's questions on the delays. Luas delays relate far more to getting approvals and so on in place. There were also delays when our main contractor projected to have design in place by a certain date and it did not, which meant construction started late. It is true that as construction began later than we had anticipated and told people, more work has been going on in parallel rather than in sequence. It would not have made sense to work in such short sections as the 100m suggested. There is no indication that sections would be that short, but——

Senator Browne

Was that the RPA's original plan?

Mr. Sheedy

Again, it is tied very much into the traffic management issues. To return to design problems, sometimes a contractor was frustrated or delayed in getting his designs complete. If he had sub-contracted to a mud shifter to excavate, he permitted the excavation activities only to find his design was not in place and he could not proceed with physical construction works. Such examples constituted much of the difficulty in that area. We tried at the start to give people an appreciation of the methodology of constructing the works in question. We spoke in terms of a typical length of 100 m in the city centre.

As I said earlier, we structured a contract for the contractor to get in and finish. He is suffering major cash flow problems running to €30 million to €40 million at the moment because he did not have the discipline to complete an area to paving level and then move on. He has been heavily penalised for that. He has some frustrations in that despite our best efforts, it was impossible to ensure that all utilities in the ground were diverted during the first phase of the works. When the contractor came to excavate for the track works he found quite a few surprises which further frustrated the entire operation.

Mr. Allen

I will continue to answer Senator Browne's questions. We will not discuss the Red Cow roundabout in detail, but the RPA consistently said at the public inquiry, and on any other occasion we were consulted, that the design of the light rail, which includes a bridge to the park-and-ride facility in the vicinity of the Red Cow, does not impede any other traffic. That has been our consistent position. It has also been the position of the National Roads Authority which accepted our statement at the public inquiry. I am not aware of the discussion which took place last week. Our position, and that of the NRA, has consistently been that as long as the light rail does not get priority at the lights at the Red Cow roundabout, the design of our system does not impede the movement of other traffic in the area.

Senator Browne

Has the Minister responded?

Mr. Allen

The Minister responded to the concern of the public and much commentary, a great deal of which was misplaced. People think we are crossing the Red Cow roundabout and mingling with the traffic. The Minister asked consultants if it would be possible to elevate the rail and he was told it would. The Minister asked the RPA whether we agreed that it was possible to elevate the rail. We did and we have responded to the Minister to outline the cost of doing so. Our position has consistently been that the design of light rail in the vicinity of the Red Cow roundabout does not impede other traffic. As evidence of that, we have built the line there with minimum impact on traffic. If building the line has minimum impact on traffic, operating will clearly have less.

Senator Browne also asked about ensuring that our employees, and those of our contractors, are in full compliance with social welfare regulations. Our responsibility is for our own employees. We do not have responsibility for the employees of our contractors.

Mr. Sheedy

We do not retain any contractor who does not have a valid C2 certificate.

Deputy Ellis

Is it a requirement that the contractor must list all the employees he has?

Mr. Allen

No.

Deputy Ellis

That should be a requirement to ensure that we can see whether or not they are tax compliant.

Mr. Allen

All of our contractors must be tax compliant. We do not make payments to them unless they are. Examining how they manage their employees' tax affairs is not the role of a public agency like ours.

Deputy Shortall

Does the RPA have a policy on that?

Mr. Allen

We have a policy on requiring the contractors and consultants we use to be demonstrably fully tax compliant.

Deputy Shortall

The policy does not go beyond that?

Mr. Allen

We do not go beyond that.

Chairman

That is the norm to be fair.

Deputy Ellis

We asked two people who were there last week who they worked for and they could not tell us.

Chairman

They will know on Friday though.

Deputy Ellis

Of course, they will know on Friday. The bottom line is that it would not surprise me if the truth was that they did not want to tell us. It is quite obvious why they would not wish to tell us who they worked for.

Mr. Allen

I turn now to Deputy Eamon Ryan's questions. I mentioned earlier that we had begun a retrospective analysis of the implementation of Luas. The analysis will be conducted with reference to the way in which light rail schemes have been carried out in other countries. France and the UK are the main countries in which similar light rail schemes have been implemented in recent years. The preliminary information we have is that if property is taken out of the equation - as values vary so much from country to country - on a per kilometre basis we are comparable to other launch of light rail schemes internationally. We are working on more detailed information which we will provide. I do not have it at my fingertips.

The Deputy asked if this project was manna from heaven for a contractor. That is clearly the case. Once a contract is entered into and it is decided to change things, any competitive tension which existed prior to the contract date will have gone. One is absolutely dependent on the contractor to make the changes. That is the reality of contracting. It is not just the case with our design and build contract with AMB, it is the reality with any similar contract.

There is a wide range of reasons for the variations and changes which have been made. Some are understandable and appropriate. South Dublin County Council said its planned works at the junction on the Long Mile Road meant it would make perfect sense to change our contractor's instructions for work in that area. This means we will not complete the light rail only to have the local authority rebuild the junction six months later. That is a significant reason. Other matters remain the subject of some dispute with our contractor.

In respect of some requirements, the contractor has claimed significant compensation which we dispute. An example is the request of the St. Patrick's Day committee to use O'Connell Street for a parade on which no height restrictions will be placed. Our contractor has a programme which means overhead wires would be in place by then. We have asked our contractor to delay that work and it is an issue of negotiation as the contractor claims, as any would, that the requirement causes major disruption elsewhere.

Another example is an archaeological find in O'Connell Street. Our policy is that work should cease immediately and that we bring in our archaeologists to examine the matter. One would not do it any other way. We expect our contractor to redeploy resources to minimise the cost. A contractor will say the incident disrupts its programme so much that the cost relates not only to work at the site which is at a standstill for three weeks; it includes the costs of consequential effects.

There is a very long list of other issues. One which Deputy Eamon Ryan asked about involves access to sites. In some instances we have not been able to allow our contractor to access a site when we had anticipated being able to do so. The reasons for this include difficulties we experienced when people in certain neighbourhoods sought injunctions to stop work. It is part of our task in project management to minimise the number of such occasions and their consequences. Some sites in Dublin were idle for some time due to such injunctions which meant we had difficulty in allowing the contractors to proceed.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

Have there been cases of outside parties going before the High Court to seek an injunction?

Mr. Allen

It seldom gets that far. Commercial negotiations would take place.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

In the cases where access was refused, has this been done by institutions along or close to the line?

Mr. Allen

The reasons for refusal vary. It may arise, for instance, where a boundary is in dispute. Rather than the Railway Procurement Agency having the dispute resolved in court a year later, we need to engage with the party disputing the boundary. Such cases seldom get to court because it takes so long to get that far. This has consequences in terms of cost and the inability on our part to give our contractor access to the section of the line in dispute.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

Has the RPA on occasion needed to pay compensation for such access?

Mr. Allen

We have conceded on boundary issues in cases which we would have been confident of winning in court a year later.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

Will Mr. Allen provide a rough outline of insurance, legal and landcosts?

Mr. Allen

Overall land costs are approximately €100 million. Some land issues have yet to be resolved. I do not have insurance and legal costs to hand.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

The cost of insurance is of the order of €4 million?

Mr. Allen

Legal costs would be minor. The RPA incurred legal expenses on the establishment of the agency and other matters.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

Is the figure in excess of €4 million?

Mr. Allen

It is a small cost; I do not have a figure. Deputy Naughten asked whether the warranty will expire before commercial operations begin. The answer is "no". On Deputy Shortall's question as to whether we will meet residents of Benburb Street, we will do so.

Deputy Shortall

Will that meeting take place within the next two weeks?

Mr. Allen

Yes.

Chairman

I thank the delegation. I believe I speak for all members of the committee when I say there is a significant gulf between what the RPA has told us and what others told the committee. If I was beamed down and had never heard of the RPA, I would consider it the most wonderful bunch of people I had ever met. If one talks to other people, however, they have a different opinion. While I do not know the reason this gulf has arisen, people do not believe the RPA is corresponding with them or informing them of delays. I accept the RPA has tried to explain its position on this issue and has identified it as a problem.

What has happened is now in the past. Looking ahead to when new lines will be demanded, will the RPA write to the committee informing us of how it would like the process to proceed in terms of the type of contract, public inquiry and public consultation required and outlining how the current problems the RPA is experiencing can be addressed? The witnesses may not want to answer my next question. Would the RPA allow the contract for another Luas line to be awarded to AMB Joint Venture?

Mr. Allen

We have discussed and accepted that because the public affected by the line believe we have not communicated effectively, this must also be the case. We are struggling to determine how we could go about this differently. If public representatives——

Deputy Shortall

That is an extremely begrudging admission. If people say they have notbeen consulted adequately, one must believethem.

Mr. Allen

That is exactly what I said.

Deputy Shortall

No, Mr. Allen accepted that people feel like that.

Mr. Allen

I intended to say that if the public believe that we have not consulted them adequately, clearly that is the case.

Chairman

That is what Mr. Allen said.

Mr. Allen

Public representatives consistently hear complaints about our approach, namely, holding 2,000 public meetings, developing a database of 7,000 people and establishing local liaison committees. Clearly, it did not satisfy expectations. If public representatives know of other approaches we could take, we would be interested to hear them. We would not go as far as to agree to everything people asked for. Irrespective of this, we must find better and different ways of communicating what are sometimes complex issues.

On future Luas lines, the whole purpose of the RPA undertaking a retrospective analysis of Luas A, B and C is to ensure that we do it much better on the next occasion. In a previous position, I worked for a long time with the World Bank. A retrospective analysis is carried out of every project the bank undertakes which examines the divergence between what was said about the project at the beginning and how it proceeded. This allows one to define what will be done on the next occasion. The bank is, for example, building a new light rail system in Poland. I have done this type of analysis in the past and the RPA has commenced such an analysis internally, for which I will get help.

A process is in place which will take time. Its purpose is to ensure that when we build an extension from Connolly Station to the Point Depot, which is urgently required as part of the development of that area, we will not have an outcry from local businesses and residents that they have not been consulted. To do this, we will clearly have to take a different approach from the current one. When we come up with ideas for doing this, we will certainly communicate with the committee.

On the Chairman's final question on whether we would give a contract to AMB for C1, we would carry out a procurement process under European Union procurement rules, under which one is not allowed to discriminate against a contractor because one is sick to the teeth of them based on previous performance. One must assess them on the basis of the rules, even if one is sick and tired of them.

Senator Dooley

I am sure the RPA would find a way.

Chairman

Should a company awarded a future contract for Luas be obliged to lodge a bond with the city to be used as compensation in the event that disruption is far in excess of what is acceptable? Should Dublin City Council not have received such a bond from AMB?

Mr. Allen

Far stronger mechanisms are required to penalise the contractor in the event of delays and so forth than those currently available to the Railway Procurement Agency. If lodging a bond with the city council would achieve this, I would be fully in favour of it. Perhaps there should be other mechanisms. Part of the purpose of public private partnerships is that delays not only result in liquidated damages under the contract, but also cause banks, equity investors and all sorts of other people to lose significant sums of money for every week they continue. This may well be a more effective mechanism than a bond which, inevitably, would be for a limited amount of money.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Allen, Mr. Sheedy and Mr. Hannon for appearing before the joint committee to give their views.

The joint committee went into private session at 11.40 a.m. and adjourned at 11.45 a.m. sine die.