Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 2 Dec 2003

Vol. 1 No. 31

Rail Network: Motion.

I move:

That this committee calls on the Minister for Transport to include the opening of key strategic sections of the western rail corridor as part of his plans to address the under spend in the Border, midlands and west region under the national development plan.

I second the motion.

This motion, which I have proposed in the absence of Deputy Naughten, is of particular importance to people in the west. It calls on the Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, to include the opening of key strategic sections of the western rail corridor as part of his plans to address the underspend in the Border, midlands and west region under the national development plan. The required rail infrastructure is already in place - it is the largest piece of infrastructure in the west, which has outstanding potential for western development. The Minister for Rural, Community and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, supports the concept of upgrading the western rail corridor. The Minister for Transport, has also indicated his support for the project.

The Limerick to Sligo rail line concerned was closed in 1976, if I recall correctly. I compliment Iarnród Éireann on certain work which has been carried out on the line. The section from Limerick to Ennis is currently being upgraded and is almost completed. A number of new commuter services will be opened from 14 December between Ennis and Limerick, on a return basis. Having seen the work in progress, I can confirm that it is of a high standard. I am satisfied that the project will be successful and that the service will be used by people travelling on to Dublin as well as those travelling into Limerick from County Clare.

Deputy Naughten's motion, which calls for "the opening of key strategic sections of the western rail corridor" is important. Nobody wants the entire line to be opened together as it is not possible. It is likely that the reopening of the entire line would cost between €230 million or €240 million. The renovation of the line between Ennis and Limerick cost approximately €600,000 per mile, which was far less than the figure that had been estimated. I call on Iarnród Éireann to start work on the next strategic section of the line between Ennis and Athenry. Having spoken to those who know the line well, I understand that it is a very easy line to work on. There are no embankments and there is plenty of room for a double line. It is very straightforward. I understand that the bridges are in very good condition. If the 34 mile stretch could be repaired for less than €600,000 per mile it would be very cheap.

This motion promotes the interests of balanced regional development and the spatial strategy which was launched by the Government last year. I assure the joint committee that the western rail line is as important to the people of the west as the metro and the Luas systems are to the people of Dublin. It will open links to Shannon Airport for industry and freight. If we are to have decentralisation in the next year or two, an improved rail network in the west will help to attract the 10,000 civil servants who will be scattered throughout the country. The amendment tabled by Deputy Peter Power is nothing more than a statement as it does not propose any actions. I have tabled this motion because we need action. An amendment was tabled by Deputy Shortall to a previous motion which related to Shannon Airport. If the original motion had been agreed, it would have set the pace for the Minister for Transport's stance on Shannon Airport and the open skies bilateral agreement. I ask the members of the joint committee, including my colleagues from the mid-west and western regions, to support the motion I have proposed.

I am happy to support this motion. We have heard a great deal of talk in recent years about the need for balanced regional development. The Government launched the national spatial strategy with great pomp and ceremony, but it is hard to recall anything that has happened as a result of the strategy. Lip service has been paid to the idea of investing in rural Ireland and trying to achieve a balance in the country's development, but very little has been done. Experience in this and other countries demonstrates that development will not take place of its own accord if transport infrastructure is not put in place.

Many members of the committee were disappointed by the results of the strategic rail review because the proposals for the western rail corridor were not examined in any detail. The review spoke of the need for local authorities to provide the development first. This is a flawed way of thinking, however, because it does not reflect how things develop. One must invest in infrastructure before ensuring that development takes place afterwards. It will not happen the other way around.

When a number of groups addressed the joint committee about rail services in the west some weeks ago there was widespread support for their objectives from all members of the committee, particularly those who represent the mid-west region. They can restate their commitment to regional development in the west and the mid-west by supporting this motion. I do not think the motion will cause any great difficulties for Government backbenchers. It calls on the Minister to commit to the "opening of key strategic sections of the western rail corridor as part of his plans to address the underspend in the Border, midlands and west region".

When the various delegations addressed the committee some weeks ago, many members spoke about the fact that the expenditure of Structural Funds in the BMW region is out of kilter. There is a huge underspend. A fraction of the money that was allocated for the BMW region has been spent so far. We should ensure that the Structural Funds that are available are spent. There should not be any further delay. The members from the mid-west region should put their money where their mouth is. The Government should spend the funding in the way that has been found to be most effective in encouraging regional development.

The amendment that will be moved to this motion is meaningless. What does it mean to call on "the Minister for Transport to continue his Department's discussions"? It is nothing. It gives no support or comfort to those in the west who are campaigning to have services reopened and upgraded. Let us stop the nonsense in that respect. This is a straightforward motion calling on the Minister to make clear his commitment to the west of Ireland and to ensure that the promise to spend Structural Funds in the BMW region is honoured. I call on members of the committee to stand up for the west of Ireland by dropping the amendment and supporting this motion.

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "this committee" and insert the following:

"- notes that, following the publication of the strategic rail review, the Minister for Transport has made consultancy advice and the advice of his officials available to the regional authorities regarding the western rail corridor,

- calls on the Minister for Transport to continue his Department's discussions with the regional authorities in the preparation of regional planning guidelines, determining the appropriate land use and settlement strategies for the regions and identifying the future infrastructural needs of those regions in terms of roads and public transport and

- notes that the Minister has asked Irish Rail to continue to facilitate the regional authorities in their work, as it has done in the case of the Cork rail study".

I wish to explain the Government side's thinking on this motion. I would like to think that there is not a significant difference between the thinking of Government members of the committee and that of Deputies Pat Breen and Naughten. I compliment and congratulate the Deputies for bringing this motion forward. I do not think there is an enormous difference between us. We are all interested in keeping the dream of a western railway corridor alive, but we have to assess how it can be approached in a strategic and practical manner. I reject Deputy Pat Breen's suggestion that the amendment is meaningless because it does not do anything. It explicitly calls on the Minister to continue a strategic process which is ongoing.

We should examine the context in which this discussion is taking place. It results from the publication last year of the report of the Booz Allen Hamilton strategic rail review. All members of the committee are familiar with the report, which has been discussed in detail on a number of occasions at this committee and other fora. The report contains the recommendations of consultants, based on their understanding of the priorities. I recall that when the Minister received the report he said it would be examined in the overall context of the roll-out of the national development plan and infrastructural projects throughout the country. The Minister said that he did not consider himself to be handcuffed by its contents.

The report sets out a number of scenarios in respect of the roll-out of rail links and attaches different priorities to the various options. It is fair to say that Booz Allen Hamilton attached a relatively low priority to the Shannon rail link. I did not agree with this decision and I do not agree with it now because I do not think it is in accordance with the contents of the national spatial strategy. I agree with Deputies Pat Breen and Shortall in that respect. We have to ask what happens now and where we go from here. It is clear that the national spatial strategy contains general and broad guidelines about the location of development in clusters and gateways. It makes recommendations about the connection between planning and infrastructure. If I read the strategy correctly, it calls on local authorities, acting individually or in groups, to set out strategic planning guidelines which determine the development of catchment areas for populations and industry in the decades to come, particularly during the term of the national spatial strategy.

All local authorities are preparing strategic planning guidelines. On publication of the strategic rail review, the Minister invited all of the relevant local authorities to come together to formulate a joint strategy for areas of mutual interest. In the west specifically, local authorities can make proposals in respect of how their catchment areas will develop in the context of projected population densities. Once strategic guidelines are in place, it will be a matter for local authorities and others to demonstrate that on the basis of their research and planning the priorities of the Booz Allen Hamilton report were incorrect, though not its ultimate conclusions. I subscribe fully to this view.

In that context, we have tabled the amendment which calls on the Minister to continue discussions among his Department and local authorities. The Minister has made his Department's resources and research available to local authorities. He has asked the authorities to prepare their regional strategic planning guidelines in the context of the information he has provided to them. They must use that information to determine appropriate land use and settlement strategies. It is up to local authorities to identify future infrastructural priorities.

While I do not disagree wholeheartedly with Deputy Pat Breen - we have a great deal in common - my amendment supports the adoption of a more strategic and practical approach to the disappointing conclusions of the Booz Allen Hamilton report in so far as they apply to the mid-west. I commend the Government amendment to the committee.

I am in broad agreement with nearly every speaker. There are some similarities between the motion and the amendment. However, the motion is quite vague. It refers to strategic sections without identifying them. Our amendment seeks to continue the role of the Department——

There is only one strategic section.

Fianna Fáil left out Athenry.

Why was that not included in the motion? If it had been, we could deal with it.

Senator Dooley did not interrupt anyone else.

I never do, Chairman, thank you. We have identified the problem with the motion. It ignores the fact that there is a need to continue to identify strategic elements. The Shannon rail link, which Deputy Peter Power has raised, is one such element. We have discussed it in the past and, hopefully, we will get the chance to discuss it in the future. Deputy Pat Breen is aware that the link is not ready to be commenced. A report has yet to be carried out. An agreement has been reached by a private developer in the region, the local authority, Shannon Development, Aer Rianta and others to ensure that any proposal which comes forward will be viable into the future.

While there is nothing particularly wrong with the motion, as drafted, it seems to put the cart before the horse. We are seeking to ensure that the necessary work of the Department continues to identify strategic infrastructure which will best serve the people. A strong case was made at a previous meeting of the committee by representatives from the western corridor. Discussion is taking place among a number of Departments and the Western Development Commission. That work is ongoing. As outlined by Deputy Peter Power, the commission is working with local authorities along the western corridor to identify the specific needs of particular towns in line with the national development plan and the spatial strategy. It is sought to ensure that the land use policies of individual local authorities are appropriate to the future development of the rail corridor. It is not a matter of opening up a section here and there simply because an individual Deputy decides it is strategic. There is a need to conform to a proper planning process. There must be proper evaluation.

I recognise that a significant amount of work has been done on this by various groups, including the group which attended the committee in the last number of weeks. There is no doubt that they have done a tremendous amount of work. Some of this work has been carried out in isolation in the sense that it has not involved the key partners of the local authorities to ensure that land use policies are coherent and supplementary to the needs of a rail line. Everybody knows there is little point in developing sections of a railway to areas which do not have the requisite density of population. Research carried out here and abroad has identified the need to change settlement policies to ensure higher densities. Concerns were raised in respect of Luas. It has been pointed out that some of its lines would run through parts of the city which did not have the densities of population required to support them. This problem must be overcome and the local authorities have been examining the matter to find ways to increase density of population.

While I support the thrust of the motion, I also support the continuation of work to ensure a greater level of rail service is delivered to the west and mid-west. While Fianna Fáil recognises the importance of balanced regional development, there is little point investing in advance of completing the ground work to prioritise the links to be developed. While our amendment recognises fully the need for an enhanced rail service in the west, it seeks to ensure that developments are not based on somebody else's strategic thinking. Plans must come from the people best qualified to formulate them. Those people are the members of the Western Development Commission which is directed and financed by the Departments of Transport and Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. Hopefully, we will see something significant and positive from the forthcoming reports.

I support this motion. While I do not wish to reiterate what has been said, the amendment to the motion suggests we are seeking to identify the future infrastructure needs of the regions in terms of roads and public transport. Are we still looking at identifying future needs in these regions? We have already had the spatial strategy. Senator Dooley spoke about the Western Development Commission, whose work is completed, and the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs will launch its report within two weeks. The time for further studies has passed. We do not need to look for money as there is a significant underspend in the——

Will Deputy Harkin accept a point of information?

Yes, I will.

Does the Deputy not consider it to be eminently reasonable before building a major infrastructure to wait until all local authorities on the western seaboard publish strategic plans for the future of their areas?

If the Deputy were living in the west he would be sick to his teeth listening to the plans and strategies which come forward each successive month or year. There have been many examples of regional planning.

Everything requires planning.

There is a chair here.

We have our spatial strategy. The Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív's report has been completed and will be launched within two weeks. The work has already been done. Given what has happened, it is meaningless to table this amendment. Furthermore, the Government does not have to go looking for money for this purpose as a significant underspend in the public transport operational programme of the national development plan could be used.

Senator Dooley referred to opening key sections of the rail corridor. This is an excellent idea because it leaves the decisions on where a project should start and finish to Government. The motion is not over-prescriptive, which is a strength rather than weakness.

Deputy Peter Power stated there is no significant difference between the motion and the amendment. The essential difference is that the amendment would not require action to be taken now which, as I stated, has always been the case in the west. We do not want to hear about strategies and plans because they are already available and the work can begin. All we want is investment. I disagree with Deputy Dooley's assertion that the motion puts the cart before the horse. The motion is about action whereas the amendment is about putting the issue on the long finger.

I beg to differ with Deputy Peter Power's comment that we are all ad idem on this issue. He stated our business today is to keep alive the dream of a western rail corridor. Our job is make the dream, or parts of it, a reality not just to keep it alive. I will outline how we could do this because it is important we are as ambitious as possible. I envisage a rail line running from Derry through Sligo, Galway and Limerick to Cork whereas the limited and understated amendment before us requests that the Minister begin building some of the key strategic sections of the line.

Perhaps Senator Dooley and others believe a rail link to Shannon Airport would not be of great strategic benefit to the west and would prefer further studies and analysis to be undertaken. I do not require further analysis because I am certain that without such a link, Shannon Airport will never be developed properly as an international airport with forward international connections.

This also applies to providing a strategic rail corridor into Galway to allow some of the 30,000 commuters who drive into the city switch from their cars to trains and reverse the transformation from the City of the Tribes to the city of the roundabouts. Galway could become a sustainable, attractive city in which people, as opposed to cars, are put first. I support the motion and while it does not go far enough, it is a start which is what we desperately need.

One could base one of the "Yes, Minister" television programmes on Deputy Peter Power's amendment. If ever language encouraged one to do nothing, it is when one uses phrases such as making more consultancy advice available or facilitating their work. For years, the Government has been engaged in a strategy of doing nothing in the area of public transport investment. The only investment of this kind in the past five years has been to make safe the national rail lines. There has been no new public transport capacity in the west or elsewhere, except for an extension of the DART to Greystones and Malahide. That is the extent of the Government's action on public transport.

That is the easy——

Please allow Deputy Eamon Ryan to finish.

I wish I had the Fianna Fáil Party manifesto for the general election on hand. It outlined a long list of achievements by the party and the Progressive Democrats Party in public transport, including how they put a lick of paint on this or that gatepost or erected fencing here and there. This is all it achieved and it is time we moved ahead. Instead of the Minister for Finance promising €7 billion in the budget to build roads, he could start by providing €7 billion for public transport.

We are not here to discuss only the national spatial strategy and how to make towns such as Sligo and Galway real centres again. We are also proposing to make these centres sustainable. The only sustainable long-term development for both the east and west is to move away from the culture of car dependency towards providing an alternative, namely, rail and bus based services which are an essential part of this infrastructure. It is time the Fianna Fáil Party benchbenchers got off the fence and started arguing for this instead of adding it to a list of a dozen other things for which they are currently fighting.

It is obvious the Government parties are paralysed in this area as the underspending on transport in the BMW region proves. I am amazed that those of my Fianna Fáil Party colleagues opposite who live in the west are so lackadaisical and accepting of this and prefer not to fight tooth and nail to develop services in the region.

While driving from Dublin to Galway recently I noticed the crying need for major infrastructural works.

Did the Senator not see the N4 on his journey?

I saw many places on the way which were not well serviced by infrastructure. We have the national spatial strategy which earmarked Sligo for major development as well as gateways and hubs in the west. There is no excuse for delaying the strategy. Senator Dooley's criticism that our motion is not sufficiently specific is outlandish. The beauty of it is that it does not tie anyone's hands but calls for immediate investment in the west and major improvements in public infrastructure.

In commenting on this issue, I am being somewhat parochial. There is no way I or my constituency colleague, Deputy Harkin, could support a motion which specifically states, in Deputy Pat Breen's words, that the section from Ennis to Athenry should be prioritised over the rest of the line. This is completely wrong.

Those words are not in the motion.

I hope the Deputy accepts he is on record as making that comment.

While I accept I said that, it is not in the motion.

I could not support that sentiment and have no doubt that if Deputy Harkin had realised what she was supporting, she would not have supported it either. Speaking as a representative of one of the constituencies affected, this is a full package. I support Deputy Eamon Ryan's view that the ideal position would be a rail link from Derry to Cork, which we had in the last century.

If we amended the motion to allow for priority to be given to the Sligo line, would the Chairman consider supporting it?

I am delighted we now have a new welded rail line constructed as part of rail development in the past four years. There is no need to take the matter further than that. The amendment must be determined first.

My colleague, Senator Dooley, stated that our motion does not identify any strategic sections.

The Deputy and Senator can argue about that in the Clare Champion.

The replies we have received today are typical of those we receive from Ministers in that they do not give answers.

Is Deputy Peter Power proposing the amendment?

Yes, but I would first like to repudiate everything the Opposition has said.

Is the amendment agreed to?

Amendment put.

Members

Vótáil.

As fewer than 15 Members are present, under Standing Orders we are obliged to wait eight minutes or until a full membership is present before proceeding to take the division.

The Joint Committee divided: Tá, 8; Níl, 7.

  • Brady, Martin.
  • Dempsey, Tony.
  • Dooley, Timmy.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Glennon, Jim.
  • Hoctor, Máire.
  • Morrissey, Tom.
  • Power, Peter.

Níl

  • Breen, Pat.
  • Browne, Fergal.
  • Cuffe, Ciarán.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • Norris, David.
  • Ryan, Eamon.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
Amendment declared carried.
Motion, as amended, put and declaredcarried.

The clerk will lay a report on this decision before both Houses of the Oireachtas.

Barr
Roinn