Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2005

Rail Network: Presentation.

I draw attention to the fact that members of this committee have absolute privilege but this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice 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. Witnesses should note that the joint committee has directed that in responding to questions posed by members they should ensure that their replies are brief and to the point.

I welcome Mr. Richard Fearn, Mr. Joe Leahy, Mr. Ray Kelly, Mr Tom Finn and Mr. Declan Murray of Iarnród Éireann and I thank them for making available to the committee their briefing note for today's meeting. It was intended that it would be taken as read but as some members have not had the time to go through the material it would be appreciated if our guests could give a brief synopsis of it. We can then have the question and answer session.

Mr. Richard Fearn

My colleagues, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Finn, are from Iarnród Éireann. Mr. Murray is from Dublin Bus and is here this afternoon to assist with questions relating to bus support for the business.

I will give a brief overview of progress on the substantial upgrade programme currently being carried out on the railway. In the past five years, €1.25 billion has been invested as part of the national development plan and the programme is ongoing. The focus to date has been on infrastructure. Some 450 miles of track have been relaid, 300 bridges rebuilt and 570 level crossings upgraded, and a major amount of related work has been carried out on fencing and coastal defence. These are substantial infrastructure improvements across the network of Iarnród Éireann.

Now that the physical infrastructure has been substantially upgraded, the next step is major investment in the rolling stock fleet. This is the part of the investment of which our customers, namely, our passengers, see the direct benefits. Some new rolling stock has already been provided on our commuter and DART routes. This summer the first deliveries of 67 new InterCity carriages for the Dublin to Cork line will arrive. Recently an order was made for 120 new InterCity rail cars for all other routes. These are to arrive in 2007.

To complement these developments, we have also been making direct investments in the area of customer service to make the network more accessible to everybody — including those with mobility or sensory impairment — by installing lifts, help points, etc. Our ticketing has been made more accessible by the provision of on-line booking facilities and automatic ticket machines at our stations. A total of 100 such machines are already in place and there are a further 50 to come. The investment, then, is not only in infrastructure but also in rolling stock and customer service.

The DART upgrade project is nearing completion. DART capacity, when the project is complete, will be double that which obtained on the service's launch in 1984. Further substantial projects are being developed to increase the capacity of rail travel in and around the city of Dublin. I refer here to: further resignalling in the central area to allow more trains to enter the central stations; extra terminal capacity and potential additional terminals; "four tracking" of a section of the line between Heuston Station and Kildare to give more capacity for commuting from the western suburbs; and a possible spur to Dunboyne and on to the M3 interchange. These projects would come together in an integrated rail plan for Dublin. The latter would include at its heart an interconnector tunnel between Spencer Dock and the Connolly Station side of our operations to Heuston Station and the western side. I anticipate that the ten-year investment plan, which will be published shortly, will cover the key elements.

I am aware that one of the main topics for discussion this afternoon will be the DART upgrade project. The objective of the investment of €176 million in the DART, the largest in Dublin's rail services since the service was opened in 1984, is to increase its capacity by 33%. As already stated, this will lead to a doubling of the DARTs capacity.

The use of eight-carriage trains is a key element of the upgrade. At present, the maximum is six carriages. Therefore, there will be an increase in capacity of one third. Making the DART more accessible for mobility impaired customers is another key element. Those who use the DART regularly will know that many of our stations are not totally accessible at present. This project aims to remedy that.

The first phase of work started on the south side of the route in October 2003 and continued until July 2004. During that phase, the DART was closed on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays to enable the lengthening of the south side stations, as well as the renewal of overhead wires to provide the increased power necessary for longer trains. The same was done on the north side from August 2004 through to last weekend to the end of May 2005, when the DART was again closed on Saturdays, Sundays and some public holidays to allow work to be carried out on the lines to Howth and Malahide. That work has now been completed and no further disruption on the north side is envisaged.

This weekend the second phase of the project — to ensure accessibility to stations — begins on the south side. It is necessary to carry out further work on the south side because of planning and property issues encountered during the first phase. An Taisce has appealed planning permission in respect of the accessibility upgrades at, for example, Killiney and Blackrock. It has also indicated its intention to appeal planning permissions for works at Salthill and Monkstown. There are other issues associated with Seapoint station. We are endeavouring to overcome these issues and believe that, subject to doing so, we will be able to complete the work at Killiney and Blackrock in the 14 weekends scheduled this summer.

The completion of the scheme involves other work that does not impact on the railway. I refer, for example, to the construction of much needed new station buildings at Howth Junction and Bayside and of new sidings at Fairview to cater for our increased fleet of trains. When these projects are completed, major benefits will flow directly to DART customers on a daily basis and everybody living along the route will be able to access the DART, which will have a much greater capacity.

There are special arrangements for the weekends this summer, a key component of which is the provision of additional bus services. That is why Mr. Murray is present. Bus capacity is to be increased by 100% on routes 7, 7A, 45, 45A, 59, 84, 145 and 184. I specifically draw the committee's attention to route 145, which is the new route along the QBC to Bray and on which buses will be provided with a 15-minute frequency. In the previous period during which work was carried out on the south side, a substantial number of people used these services. We know, therefore, that they provide an alternative while such work is being carried out.

Special bus services will also operate for special events, such as the soccer match at Lansdowne Road on Saturday, 4 June. We are suspending work for the air show at Bray on 20 and 21 August in order that DART trains can run.

An extensive communications programme has been put in place and posters, advertisements and announcements on AA Roadwatch have highlighted the closures. Media advertising is also being used and 200,000 leaflets have been printed and distributed. For a number of weeks, large and substantial advertisements have appeared on DART trains to indicate that further works will be carried out on the south side this summer.

I wish to comment now on to the third item with which I was asked to deal, namely, the western rail corridor. This is currently a disused section of railway running from Collooney, which is on the Dublin-Sligo line, to Ennis via Claremorris, Tuam and Athenry. The strategic rail review, published in 2003, examined the case for reopening the line and concluded that there was no economic reason for doing so. The previous Minister for Transport subsequently commissioned a working group to independently examine the case for the reopening of the western rail corridor. Iarnród Éireann has been part of this group and has provided key information for it and engaged consultants to prepare cost estimates and demand forecasts. The chairman of the working group recently published his report and passed it to the Minister for Transport. The report is being examined by the Department and we await the outcome of these deliberations.

I thank Mr. Fearn. I have one or two questions. What will be the cost to Iarnród Éireann of the objections lodged by An Taisce in respect of the second phase of the south side DART works? Will a commercial cost arise as a result of delays?

Mr. Fearn

I will ask Mr. Leahy to answer that question.

My other question relates to the western rail corridor. If clearance were to be granted for that project and if the Government decided to proceed with it, what would be the estimated timeframe involved for its completion?

Mr. Fearn

I will answer that question but Mr. Leahy will first answer the question relating to delays on the south side DART works.

Mr. Joe Leahy

We have not quantified the cost but such a cost will undoubtedly arise. Contractors have already been engaged. Any delays in the implementation of a project automatically incur costs. In some instances, we will be able to meet the deadline for the works, even though the planning process is ongoing. We may obtain permission in time but there may still be delays. In other instances, works may have to be deferred. Where that happens, the cost addition will be substantial because contracts will have to be terminated. New contracts would have to be negotiated in the future.

Mr. Leahy referred to the cost being significant. What would be his estimate in that regard?

Mr. Leahy

I cannot provide numbers. On any individual contract, however, it could be €500,000 to €2 million.

Is there any prospect of entering discussions with An Taisce to iron out these problems before the planning appeals process is entered into? This should be done and perhaps we should ask An Taisce to come before us to resolve these difficulties. I note from the submission that representatives from that body were supposed to attend a meeting with Iarnród Éireann but did not do so.

Mr. Leahy

That is correct. At this stage we have either missed the boat or we will achieve our goals within the specified timeframe, it is that type of scenario. As a result of some delays in obtaining planning permission, works at some stations cannot be completed within the 14-week stoppage this summer. Works not done in this period will be put on hold. We will do as much as possible within planning constraints. However, some works will be deferred.

For how long will they be deferred?

Mr. Leahy

: It could be six months or longer.

Will problems subsequently arise?

Mr. Leahy

We are somewhat surprised at the level of opposition to weekend closure on DART lines. This has led us to reconsider how we will operate in the future. If we have to return to certain stations, we will have to examine if work can be done without the necessity to close lines. Within our current margins, we will put in place foundations. It will, therefore, be fabrication work that will have to be done at a later date. It may be possible to do this at night, although I cannot make a commitment in that regard.

Would it be better if the three issues were dealt with separately rather than having members talking back and forth?

I will leave it up to members. The most major question that arises relates to the DART. Perhaps we should deal with that matter first and then move to the other issues. Is this arrangement acceptable?

It is acceptable as long as the other issues will not be dealt with at 6 p.m.

The Deputy and I will ensure that this will not happen.

Yes because we want to discuss the western rail corridor.

I think we can deal with them all——

I think the western rail corridor could be dealt in two minutes.

I suggest that we deal with them in reverse order.

Mr. Fearn

If we are to deal with the western rail corridor first, can all the relevant questions be listed to facilitate me in answering them?

We will take the questions to make life easier for Mr. Fearn.

I welcome the delegation. I am delighted we are starting with the western rail corridor as any independent person reading this presentation could be forgiven for believing that Iarnród Éireann's remit began and ended with Dublin, the M50 and the Red Cow roundabout. There is little mention of rail services throughout the country, which is regrettable. The fact that the majority of people here are from Dublin does not mean that there is not a lot more to this country than the capital city.

The Deputy has a chip on his shoulder.

Deputy Peter Power is drawing fire on himself. He should ask a question.

The presentation contains four paragraphs about the western rail corridor. There is no assessment of or commentary on the report recently presented to the Minister for Transport. The committee would like to know whether Iarnród Éireann supports the conclusions in the report. No one could state that what is written in the final pages of the report is a ringing endorsement for the western rail corridor?

It is commonly recognised that the final element of the western rail corridor consists of the Limerick-Ennis line. I would like Mr. Fearn to comment on the increase in numbers using this section of the corridor in the 12 months since the new service was introduced. In that context, would it be worthwhile extending the line from Sixmilebridge to Shannon Airport — on what is commonly known as the Shannon Airport spur — and would this be an important element of the western railway corridor?

I have three or four questions. There is no point in covering all the ground. I am an advocate of the western rail corridor and have been for many years.

First, Mr. Fearn's group sat on the steering committee under Mr. Pat McCann. Were Iarnród Éireann's viability costings provided for this project? Does it agree with the findings? I understand that the Iarnród Éireann group sat on some of the sub-committees dealing with this subject in the past year and that the figures given were supplied by the company. I ask this because some people believe Iarnród Éireann does not want to be involved in the western rail corridor. Obviously, however, if Iarnród Éireann supplied the figures on the viability of the project, we would like to hear about that. The decision will be taken by Government but, as the provider of the service, Iarnród Éireann must have specific and clear views as to how it fits into the jigsaw of the overall delivery of an efficient railway service throughout the country. What are Iarnród Éireann's views on the western rail corridor?

We had no trouble over the years seeing the importance of it. For a variety of reasons we believe it is vital for the future prosperity of the west that it is established quickly. However, there is a general public view that Iarnród Éireann is less than committed. Can the representatives give us the economic facts and figures that were given to the committee in respect of the viability of this project?

As a mere Dubliner, I hesitate to intrude on this local matter. The brief resumé provided by the representatives states that the strategic rail review published in 2003 concluded that there was no economic case for reopening the line. I do not know whether we are being misled but various Ministers have told the Seanad that there is a strong case for reopening it. Somebody, therefore, got it wrong. Who was it? What is the real case and who can we believe? Is it the case that in 2003 there was no economic case for reopening it but that in 2005 there is such a case, as we have been told by our political masters? I support my colleague's opinion about a spur to Shannon. It is blindingly obvious that it should be included.

My questions are related and refer to the conflict between the report produced for Iarnród Éireann and the working group report. Perhaps the representatives will clarify some suggestions that have appeared in the media. This is a huge investment which would be most important for the west and for strategic reasons such as regional development and the development of the spatial strategy. Is this the type of investment we should make? When there are two conflicting reports, it is difficult for a politician to make a decision on how we should proceed. Can the representatives clarify if this is a viable proposition?

Media reports suggest that only a fraction of the costs were included in the working group report and that many were excluded. There was also a suggestion that it would require a subsidy of €30 million per year. Is that suggestion wildly inaccurate? Does that money relate to the opening of the line or the parts of the line that would be feasible and could be made economically viable? I do not expect everything to be economically viable in the first year but, taking account of the benefits that might accrue to the west, is there a case to be made for opening the line?

Notwithstanding the huge benefits to the region through which the western rail corridor runs, is it possible to state that this is a national priority, given the congestion being caused in the east and the loss of Iarnród Éireann customers because people have stopped using the service due to congested trains? Can it be articulated to the Government that this is not just a matter for the development of the west but that it is also a national priority? Will it be possible to use the reopening of the western rail corridor, sooner rather than later, for providing other services such as broadband? We are discussing an overall economic development objective here as well as a transport link.

The representative quoted the strategic rail review on the western rail corridor. Does he accept that there was a fundamental flaw in that review in so far as it referred to the need to have existing development in place first before investing in major infrastructure? Does he accept that the mistake this country has made has been to provide the housing or industrial development first, leaving people waiting up to ten or 20 years for the transport infrastructure to follow? Does it not make more sense, particularly if we are interested in balanced regional development, to put the infrastructure in place first and to encourage development to take place along that route? Does he accept that this is a more progressive way to approach the issues of transport and development? What is the projected cost for laying or replacing the tracks, as opposed to the railcars?

Mr. Fearn

I wish to draw a distinction between the western rail corridor project and our other schemes. Our first duty is to run the existing operational rail network safely and efficiently. Deputy Peter Power mentioned the Limerick-Ennis line improvements. The Limerick-Ennis line was never closed or off our network. It has been substantially improved as part of our operational network. Like most of the other lines in the network, its track was renewed and new rolling stock, with improved service frequency, was put on it. The same model we are applying elsewhere has been applied to Limerick-Ennis. It is our duty to do that in developing a safe and efficient network.

The section of the western rail corridor from Collooney-Ennis, via Claremorris, Tuam and Athenry, is not part of the operational network at present. As such, therefore, it is not an Iarnród Éireann decision as to whether it should be prioritised. It is a decision for the Government. The strategic rail review concluded in 2003 that there was no economic case for it. Members of the committee will be aware that cases can be made on either pure economic grounds or social benefit and economic grounds. The extent to which the case is made on social and economic grounds can influence the decision.

I am sure that when the Minister for Transport commissioned the working group on the western rail corridor he had in mind examining the feasibility of what could be done. The report, copies of which the committee members might have seen and which is currently the subject of deliberation by the Government, splits the route into sections. It examines, for example, Athenry to Ennis, Claremorris to Athenry through Tuam and the northern section from Collooney to Claremorris. It concludes that the feasibility of each might be different.

With regard to the costs associated with feasibility, Iarnród Éireann was party to the process in that we engaged consultants to prepare the cost estimates. I am not in a position to discuss those estimates with the committee this afternoon. I do not have the detailed estimates with me. At this stage, the estimates that have been included in the report produced by the chairman of the working group are part of the deliberations of the Department. However, the cost estimates were prepared by consultants engaged by Iarnród Éireann.

The consultants also examined the amount forecasts for the sections of the route that were being considered in detail. It is not possible for me to say what is likely to be the outcome of those conclusions. Iarnród Éireann's duty is to respond when the deliberations are over and some conclusions have been reached. These sections are not part of our current duty of care and operation of the railway. They would be an addition to our network if they were brought back into service.

We have worked with the working party and have made our expertise available. We are very keen, as is everybody in this room, to hear the outcome of the deliberations. Those deliberations will not, however, be based on pure economic considerations, they will be based on social as well as economic considerations. The latter is a matter for Government.

Does that mean that Mr. Fearn does not know the level of subsidy that would be required if the line was reopened or is it that he does not wish to comment?

Mr. Fearn

It is honestly saying that I do not know the level of subsidy. The level of subsidy of an operation is very much dependent on the level of operation. The social decision that needs to be made is the level of operation the Government would like to see if the line was to be opened. That would determine the input costs, arising from the amount of work that would have to be done on the track, the number of trains needed to operate it, the trained crews required and so on. Those decisions would decide the level of subsidy required. I am not avoiding the question. Until those details are specified, nobody could say what would be the level of subsidy. Important decisions must be made by Government before Iarnród Éireann has a duty to respond.

Can Mr. Fearn state for the record whether Iarnród Éireann accepted the recommendations of the working group consultants employed to review the viability of this project?

Mr. Fearn

The consultants in the working party did not make recommendations. They supplied answers to questions. Iarnród Éireann, on behalf of the working party, engaged the consultants who prepared cost estimates and demand forecasts. Those estimates and forecasts are referred to in the report of the chairman of the working party. However, there were no recommendations. I am not, therefore, in a position to agree or disagree because there is nothing with which to agree or disagree. They were cost estimates in response to questions raised by the working party.

I have a final question. There is a touch of "around the houses" about this debate. Does Iarnród Éireann accept the findings of the working group that costs on section one, the 36 miles from Ennis to Athenry, were capital costs of €74.7 million, or €2.1 million per mile? Does it accept this figure as the cost of building that railway? Is that an economic price to pay for what we believe is an economically viable proposition?

Mr. Fearn

It is true that some questions remain to be answered about other costs associated with the route. The consultants answered some of the questions asked, specifically those concerning the engineering costs to reopen the route. Those are some of the costs highlighted. If and when there is a response from Government as to any particular section of the route, Iarnród Éireann will have to examine carefully the full operating costs. As I said in reply to an earlier question, the full cost of operating a railway is the cost of renewing or reopening the physical infrastructure of that railway, the cost of rolling stock, the cost of crews and so on.

I am not in a position to say that all those costs are covered in the working party's report. I am simply saying that the cost estimates that were required of the consultants were provided. These are now a matter on which the Government must deliberate and in due course there may be further questions posed to Iarnród Éireann. I am not currently in a position to say that this is the total cost of the operation.

Surely the consultants who worked on behalf of Iarnród Éireann knew they were dealing with the construction of a railway section. They and Iarnród Éireann must have known that.

Mr. Fearn

I am not here this afternoon to speak on behalf of the working group. I am speaking on behalf of Iarnród Éireann and I have explained to the best of my ability where we stand in this situation. Our first duty is to the current operational railway and that is the duty we are carrying out. If, as a result of a Government decision, the operating railway was added to with a section or sections of the western rail corridor, we would have to work in detail on all the costs and operational requirements for that route. The questions the working group asked the consultants are a matter for the group and its chairman. The chairman of the working group has made his report to the Minister and it is being considered by him and his Department. I cannot go any further on behalf of Iarnród Éireann because I am not in a position to do so.

I cannot say that I am satisfied.

We, as the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport, are just trying to clarify this issue. If the Government asked Iarnród Éireann, as the body charged with operating railways in Ireland, for its opinion as to whether the western railway corridor is a viable proposition, would it say it is not in a position to give an opinion or that it has no opinion on the question? What would the answer be if the Government called in Iarnród Éireann tomorrow and asked that question?

Mr. Fearn

It would very much depend on the specific question the Minister asked.

Based on the information currently available, in the opinion of Mr. Fearn, as chief executive of Iarnród Éireann, is the western railway corridor viable?

Mr. Fearn

It is extremely difficult to answer that question in such general terms. I am not trying to avoid it. If we were asked what we mean by viable, we would say that anything is viable if it gets a subsidy. If the question is whether the western rail corridor——

It is all subsidised.

Mr. Fearn

Of course, but there are different levels of operation. If a level of operation was specified at which the western rail corridor would be operated and we were asked to calculate what would be necessary to provide that level of operation and the level of subsidy we would require, we could answer that question. I cannot answer it this afternoon because we do not have that information with us. If the Minister came at some stage and said that he had examined the report and asked what would be required to be done and what level of subsidy we would require if a certain level of service was to operate on the route, we would be able to answer the question. However, I cannot answer it this afternoon. The question cannot be answered in general terms, it must be specific.

The original report prepared for Iarnród Éireann in 2003 stated that there was no case for the reopening of the western rail corridor. What were Iarnród Éireann's estimated costings at that stage for the reopening of that line? There were definitely costings prepared for that report in 2003 so Mr. Fearn can surely tell us what the estimated costs were for 2003.

Mr. Fearn

I do not have that information with me this afternoon, but perhaps Mr. Finn has it.

Mr. Tom Finn

Yes. On a point of clarification, the report to which the Chairman refers, the strategic rail review, was not our report as such.

Yes but I take it that Iarnród Éireann had an input into that report with regard to the cost.

Mr. Finn

No, we did not make an input. The consultants, Booz Allen Hamilton, who completed the report made their estimates of the costs of it. There was some concern afterwards regarding the amount of the costs but the work done by our consultants has confirmed that the costs included in the strategic rail review were accurate.

How much did they cost?

Mr. Finn

The amount was €360 million.

What would be the extra cost in terms of subsidisation based on those figures to run this line? How much would it cost per passenger carried nationally?

Mr. Fearn

I am not able to answer that this afternoon without a specification of level of service.

We want answers to our questions.

Mr. Fearn

I cannot provide an answer. It depends on the frequency of train service.

I agree with Mr. Fearn that he needs to know the number. I take it, however, that when the original proposal was being prepared, allowance was made for a specific — for example, two, three or four — number of trains. I have a final question on the western rail corridor. From the point of view of the entire rail system, is it not very important to have an integrated system to take passengers from Dublin around a full circle down to Sligo, on to Ennis and Cork and back across and up to Dublin? This section is the one that prevents us having a full rail network around the country. Is it not important to put it in place for that reason alone?

Mr. Fearn

As a railwayman with 32 years' experience — admittedly 30 of those years were spent in the UK and just two here — I am of the view that the most important thing for us is to ensure that our existing railway is safe and efficient. That is what everybody on the Iarnród Éireann team has been prioritising and quite rightly so. If the Government were to inform us there is a social case or a social and economic joint case for extending that network and linking the west, then as professional railway people we would need to respond to that. However, I explained in my opening statement the very substantial amounts of money we are continuing to spend to make the existing Iarnród Éireann network a safe, efficient, up-to-date and modern operation. That is what we are all paid to do. We shall continue to do that and will respond to any further challenges if they come about in due course if the network is extended.

I have a request from Deputy Lowry to raise a question about the Limerick-Ballybrophy line. As he needs to leave the meeting shortly, with the indulgence of the members I will allow him to ask his question now.

I ask the question in the context of what the acting chief executive has said. He stated that his and the company's first duty of care is to the existing operational network. In the past five years Iarnród Éireann has spent €1.25 billion on the infrastructure, which is to be commended and the company is to be complimented on its implementation of that part of the plan. He also said the emphasis would now move away from the physical infrastructure and on to customer care, which leaves me concerned about where we stand on improvements to the Limerick-Ballybrophy line. Within the company's programme, have any resources been allocated for any improvements on the network from Limerick to Ballybrophy? If so, what are those improvements and what is the timescale for their implementation?

It is accepted that the network on the line from Limerick to Ballybrophy is old and dilapidated. The services are badly scheduled and intermittent. The integration of the service with the Dublin-Cork line is almost non-existent because a passenger arriving at Ballybrophy usually misses the next connecting train from Cork to Dublin or Dublin to Cork. I hear a significant number of complaints about the service. The service currently offered is unreliable, sluggish and uncomfortable. While some train services will use reasonably good carriages, in the main the rolling stock on the line is in an appalling condition.

There is an established need for a commuter service between Nenagh and Limerick. Nenagh and Ballina have effectively become satellite towns for Limerick city. A significant investment has been made in the area in residential property. Students are anxious to get to the University of Limerick and people are anxious to get to work in Limerick city. Owing to the lack of public rail service, we have massive congestion on our roads network. It would be economically viable to improve that service. It is not fair to us to say that we must establish the need. Unless we get a reliable, comfortable efficient and effective service on that line, people will not avail of the services. I ask the representatives of Iarnród Éireann to consider this seriously and indicate whether they have any proposals. I understand the Minister for Transport has already indicated his wish to Iarnród Éireann that some of its resources be put at the disposal of this line.

Does Deputy Stanton wish to raise a question on this subject?

No. My question relates to a different matter.

To what matter does it relate?

I am interested in the situation in Cork.

We are taking this specific question from Deputy Lowry. We will then return to the issue of the DART, as agreed. Deputy Stanton will need to wait until later to pose his question.

That is acceptable.

Mr. Fearn

I am familiar with the Ballybrophy to Nenagh and Limerick line. I recently met a delegation of people in a hotel in Nenagh to discuss the route. I am in a position to respond, I hope positively, to some of the points in Deputy Lowry's question. A couple of lines operating out of Limerick have tended to be quite lightly used in recent years — the Limerick to Waterford and the Limerick to Nenagh and Ballybrophy routes. Towards the end of 2004 we allocated new rolling stock on both of those routes. The trains now on the daily service from Limerick to Nenagh and Ballybrophy are not routinely the very old worn out carriages, they are the new generation of two-car railcars that operate out of our depot at Limerick. The same applies to the Limerick-Waterford line. While we have started on that line, we will also be carrying out similar works on the Limerick-Ballybrophy line to relay track. At present, we are carrying out a series of works on the Limerick-Waterford line. We have been renewing the infrastructure, which increases the life of the line, gives improvements in journeys, etc. The combination of improvements to the track and the allocation of new diesel multiple-unit railcars to these routes demonstrates that we are endeavouring to improve them and that we regard them as part of our operational network into the future.

The final point related to the service frequency and the nature of the service offered. I fully accept that the demand will be directly related to the nature of the service offered. I was disappointed to hear the Deputy's feelings about missed connections. As part of my custodianship of the general managers who operate these railways, I monitor the extent to which we have delays which lead to problems such as missed connections. To my knowledge, it is not a routine daily problem that connections are missed at Ballybrophy. With the allocation of the new rolling stock to that line, I hope it will be a very rare occurrence. I do not have statistics with me in respect of this matter but I will check the position when I return to my office. However, it is certainly not a problem of which I had become aware and not a matter to which people have drawn my attention.

While I know the Deputy's question primarily concerned the Nenagh line, I will give an example on the Limerick-Waterford line, on which we changed the timetable last year. We have tried to improve the connections at Limerick Junction to provide a better service to feed passengers to places such as Clonmel, Cahir, Carrick-on-Suir, Tipperary town, etc., in that area. The next matter will be to examine the Nenagh branch timetable. I am not in a position to publish a new timetable this afternoon. However, I understand the issue as regards commuter opportunity between Nenagh and Limerick. With modern rolling stock and quicker turnarounds, it is now often possible to get more out of the new trains than used to be the case — with the requirement to couple and uncouple locomotives, etc. — with the older trains.

I would like to be positive about the matter. It is on our agenda and part of the network we operate. Rolling stock has been replaced and the track in question is included in the improvement programme, although we are working on the Waterford line at present. We will continue to make progress and, in due course, we will be able to demonstrate to the people of Nenagh that the line is as important to us as we know it is to them.

I thank Mr. Fearn. We will now revert to the DART upgrade project.

As there are many speakers who live along the line or who represent constituents who do so, I will be brief. I am concerned about the accessibility of stations. I have wondered in public about why the proper planning applications were not made at the correct time, which is a matter I will not revisit. I am concerned by reports that the chairman of CIE said anything which is not done as part of the summer works will not be done at all. There are at least two stations for which planning permission has yet to be obtained as a result of appeals by An Taisce. Four applications were appealed but it appears that two will be settled. If the outstanding appeals cannot be resolved in time for completion as part of summer works, will there be a further set of works?

I am concerned about the use of the word "deferred" by Mr. Fearn, particularly in light of the comments made by the Iarnród Éireann chairman. It is unfair that a failure by the company to obtain the proper information at the right time should disadvantage the disabled. Much as I regret the fact that the line may have to close again, I ask that, at least, the important work in question be carried out. Can the matter be clarified?

Deputy Shortall has given her slot to Deputy McManus.

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to ask questions on south side weekend closures. I represent a constituency which is not in Dublin but I live in a town which is built on the railway line and which is significantly dependent on the DART. People from east and south Wicklow use the DART and appreciate the service provided. Bray provides free parking for train users. Commuters refer to this as a park-and-ride facility but it is simply part of the town's normal parking provision.

The Deputy must ask a question.

It is a pity the expected level of consultation did not take place between Iarnród Éireann and the town council. I beg the Chairman's indulgence on this point. The council found out about the second round of closures only very recently, despite the fact that they will be of great inconvenience to families, visitors, businesses, commuters and workers. The last time the line was closed for weekends was during the winter but it will now close during the high season. It will be difficult for Bray to welcome its usual high number of visitors in the absence of weekend DART services.

It is very late in the day to raise these issues. I was taken aback at the lack of information from Iarnród Éireann on the implications of station closures. It is an issue from which the company should learn. Mr. Leahy had the good grace to state that he was surprised at the level of concern among local communities, which I welcome as an important recognition of how deep-seated is people's anger. I also welcome Mr. Leahy's statement that any future work will be done, if possible, at night. It is difficult to explain to members of the public who visit the Continent and other countries why weekend closures are necessary.

Does the Deputy have a question?

I am asking why weekend closures happen.

We are not talking about the Continent. If the Deputy has a direct question, will she please put it? We have done the Deputy the courtesy of allowing her to take Deputy Shortall's slot on the basis that she would put questions.

I appreciate that. I have asked about contact with Bray Town Council and I am in the middle of asking why the international approach of night-time works cannot be adopted rather than closing the line at weekends.

To ask the question without the dissertation would have saved five minutes.

I would appreciate a little leniency because this is a matter of great importance.

Other Deputies and Senators want to contribute.

I do not intend to cut across anybody. Can Mr. Fearn explain the length of time over which works will occur, despite the fact that up to four stations will be excluded from the project while no works are intended for Seapoint station? Surely a shorter period is needed, which would be welcome news. Why does the plan not make provision for the possibility of a shorter programme? We seem to be getting the worst of all worlds.

While the provision of additional buses is welcome, can Dublin Bus indicate from where those buses will come? Will there be a shortfall elsewhere in the system or are the buses additional units which do not necessitate the shifting of resources from one place to another?

While I am not a member of the committee, I asked to attend because I wrote to Mr. Fearn on 13 May but did not receive the courtesy of a reply. Mr. Fearn and I are public servants and I put to him straightforward questions. As a public representative of the people of Dún Laoghaire, I deserve a response on what is happening. Why did Mr. Fearn ignore my letter?

Mr. Leahy said he was surprised at the public outcry but people learned about the line closures very late in the day. I heard the company's press representative say on radio this afternoon that the closures were flagged in a parliamentary question. If parliamentary questions form part of the company's public affairs strategy, it is unsurprising that it has been met with such opposition. I received a letter from Dalkey heritage centre, which had to close at weekends due to a lack of customers during the last phase of line closures. It is now to be hit again, this time at the height of the tourism season. I have been begged to ask for a concession of some kind. How are these people to survive? Dún Laoghaire is the gateway to Ireland and passengers who arrive at weekends will wonder why there is no service.

I appreciate that the Chairman wants us to ask direct questions and mine relate to the public information campaign. I have been examining the DART website for updates all day. One must look very carefully and continue very far down the homepage to find a reference to the weekend closure of south side services. The site's news bulletin box says "No news today" but this is big news about which, by God, the company will hear a great deal.

As Deputy McManus said, a lifeline is being removed. I do not know if Mr. Fearn has ever had the pleasure of walking along Dún Laoghaire pier at the weekends, but many Dublin people have. They get there by taking the very enjoyable journey on the DART, which is to be taken from them. While I appreciate the provision of a replacement bus service, if it is as useful as it was the last time, people will be very disappointed. Mr. Fearn will accept that the service was not a success and that issues of overcrowding arose. While I had hoped to be reassured by today's meeting, the opposite has happened.

Mr. Leahy referred to planning problems associated with the additional works. Why did he not put all his ducks in a row when he first suspended the service? If he knew that the problems which have arisen would occur — full access is, for course, important — why did he not make adequate arrangements? People on the south side were promised that the service would be suspended only once and were asked to bear with the authorities. The people did so, despite ferocious opposition, in the hope of a good service. It is unacceptable to suspend the service for a second time in 18 months.

Mr. Leahy indicated that circumstances are such that the service will be suspended for a third time. This represents very bad planning. I have criticised him for having a cavalier attitude to the travelling public. He has demonstrated this again. I get the impression that he could not care less if he suspends the service. I also got this impression when my letter was ignored. This is not good enough.

What alternatives has Iarnród Éireann explored? Mr. Leahy is now considering whether the work could be done without closure. It seems he is only exploring this option after trouble has arisen. The work being done in each area, such as Seapoint, will be more or less the same. Mr. Leahy is now exploring options because he realises it is rather contemptuous to suspend the service.

Has it been considered that diesel trains can be run? What about suspending the service north or south of Dún Laoghaire? The members of the delegation listed a few events that are taking place and stated that they would be prepared to run the service on the days in question. They did not mention the Festival of World Cultures that takes place in Dún Laoghaire. It is very successful and is held in August. It is successful because people travel to it on the DART.

There is no guarantee that the works will end in four weeks. Mr. Leahy said he has no idea. He is going into this process blind, he has not got permission for some services and he is on a wing and a prayer in this regard. That is not good enough. This is the second time the service will be suspended in 18 months and Mr. Leahy is telling us it is to occur on a third occasion. Mr. Kenny indicated on the radio this afternoon that there will, for a fourth time, be signalling problems. That is not acceptable.

Iarnród Éireann is given a subvention to run a service seven days per week, although we have had a service on only five days per week. Will the Minister consider whether this is an appropriate use of money?

I thank the Chairman for allowing me to attend this meeting because I am not a member of the committee. The chairman of CIE and many of the members of the delegation were kind enough to meet me and representatives of Dún Laoghaire Business Association, a Dalkey heritage group and others on 30 March 2005 to discuss many of these issues. At the time, it was agreed that a bus service would be provided to Dalkey to make up for the shortfall during the last series of closures. We were obviously grateful for this.

A number of points must be made about the submission. It is not fair to apportion all blame to An Taisce for the current delays affecting Blackrock and Salthill. It would be more generous to acknowledge that Iarnród Éireann promised it would do all the work in one tranche in 2003. Owing to its failure to acknowledge possible planning delays, we are now dealing with a second tranche. However, An Taisce is probably misguided in trying to vent these matters again before An Bord Pleanála, considering that this has already been done. We should also acknowledge that An Taisce has a statutory function to deal with these kinds of matters and is fully entitled to bring them before An Bord Pleanála. I asked representatives of An Taisce to meet me in recent weeks but, ironically, I received no response from them.

Were the delegates in contact with the Minister for Transport regarding his exercising his power to have An Bord Pleanála deal with the appeals from An Taisce in an expedited manner so all these works can done during the proposed closure over 14 weekends this summer? The Minister has this power and it represents the solution to this problem. There is no reason to leave Blackrock behind.

If there are to be further closures, will Iarnród Éireann guarantee that they will not take place in the run-up to Christmas, at Christmas or during the tourist season? It is clear that everybody has been badly affected by the two closures. How long will the next closure last? Deputy McManus is correct to ask why 14 weekends are involved if some of the significant works have been excluded.

All the work is very important and commuters on the south side of Dublin and in north Wicklow have been very patient and understanding. They welcome the work and there is no disputing this. However, the issues that have arisen must be analysed. Iarnród Éireann should be generous enough to acknowledge that it made a mistake initially. Whatever An Taisce's position may be, it is entitled to make its appeal.

I thank the delegation for attending and for informing us about what the company is doing.

On the DART upgrade, as a customer of Iarnród Éireann who travels from the west side of Dublin, I find it infuriating that each morning commuters must wait in the Drumcondra area for the DART to leave Connolly and proceed to Fairview before their needs can be served. The DART is obviously accorded greater priority than the western line service. When the upgrade is completed, will this practice be discontinued? It has been going on for years.

The delegates stated that further projects, including DART resignalling to increase central area capacity, are planned. I had believed that this was the purpose of the DART upgrade. Are the delegates saying that further resignalling works will have to be carried out? What extra services can be made available on the western line in the 12 months or two years before the new service on the spur from Clonsilla to the M3 comes into operation?

What is the position on the integrated plan for Dublin? The delegates say that the ten-year investment plan is due and that they are confident that key aspects will be included? Can we wait ten years? To what key aspects are the delegates referring? Do they believe that some aspects might not be included?

Senator Morrissey's questions are more relevant to the next section.

I apologise for my momentary absence. I was called to another meeting.

I wish to comment on the second phase of the south side works, which we are addressing at present. I strongly support the Chairman's suggestion that we should invite An Taisce to come before the committee in order that members might hear what it has to say. There has been considerable and pointed comment about An Taisce by the delegates. I am interested in this matter because, by and large, I support An Taisce. It has been the object of a sustained and not always entirely honest political campaign to discredit it. As Deputy Andrews stated, it has a statutory function. There has been a change of regime at the top of the organisation and it seems that questions may have to be asked if letters are not being answered. However, if Deputy Fiona O'Malley is to be believed, Iarnród Éireann does not seem to be entirely blameless in this regard. The phrase, "Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile", with which the delegates are no doubt completely familiar, springs to mind.

If An Taisce is not taking the opportunity to reach a proper accommodation, it is very much to be regretted. Deputy Andrews indicated that it failed to take the opportunity to meet him. This may be because it is undergoing reorganisation. I have not come across the very sharp language used in respect An Taisce very often. It seems there is an attempt to shift the blame. These things should have been foreseen because there is a track record here and an appeals process which should have been factored in.

The delegation expressed disappointment with what it perceived was a disregard by An Taisce for the needs for those with impaired mobility. That is a serious charge, the language is heavily loaded and there is a degree of presumption contained therein. The charge is not factual. The committee prefers to have factual rather than emotionally loaded presentations, regardless of whether people at An Taisce have stirred emotions.

The delegation went on to say that An Taisce did not approach the matters constructively, which is extremely damning of that organisation and for that reason, it is important that the committee invites An Taisce to appear before it. What were the issues in question? It appears that Iarnród Éireann felt that in the first phase of An Taisce's objections, the organisation was correct and it went some way towards addressing its concerns. Apparently, An Bord Pleanála felt the same in that regard, that An Taisce was justified in its first phase of objections. What is the problem now and is it serious or can it be ironed out? Is it a matter of artistic judgment whether a particular paint or design of ironwork conflicts with the marine prospect or is it something much more practical? Could a member of the delegation outline the kernel of the objections from An Taisce, bearing in mind that the committee may hear from the organisation itself, in order that members can determine what the problem is and whether it is serious?

I, too, want to get to the bottom of this matter. In relation to the DART works and the disappointing log-jam that appears to have set in between Iarnród Éireann and An Taisce, can Iarnród Éireann learn any lessons from this situation? I ask this question because under legislation, Iarnród Éireann has enjoyed something resembling planning immunity for some works. Such works were a very important part of its remit but it could be said that this immunity has created a culture of non-consultation. That applies to consultation with the local authority, which has been an issue in the past. I thought that lessons had been learned and that consultation was now more evident. Is it the case that the requirement to complete a planning application for the work being contemplated was seen as something new for the Iarnród Éireann? What is the difference between this and other work that did not require a planning application?

I also ask the delegation to correct the record of this committee because it is disingenuous to say that An Taisce's remit is to disregard the needs of those with impaired mobility. That is certainly not its remit. Perhaps some advance consultation could have prevented this scenario from arising. Has that lesson been learned and can Iarnród Éireann make amends by engaging in consultations now?

Mr. Fearn

There are a lot of questions which I will split up into a number of areas. However, before I do that, I apologise to Deputy Fiona O'Malley for my failure to reply more promptly to her letter. I received the letter, which was dated 13 May, on 16 May. I asked a number of colleagues to collate information for me to give the Deputy a detailed reply. I only signed a detailed reply yesterday and I accept that it took too long and I apologise for that.

The questions posed fit into three categories. In the first category are questions on the content of the works, the process, scheduling and so forth, which Mr. Leahy will answer. The second category of questions deal with the consultation process, which Mr. Kelly will address. The final category of questions relate to the Dublin Bus support for our programme and the differences in comparison with previous occasions. Mr. Murray will address this final category of questions.

Mr. Leahy

Deputy McManus referred to my comment to the effect that I was somewhat surprised at the level of opposition to weekend closures of DART stations. That comment arises in the context of this being a very large project, costing €176 million. We have a very short timeframe in which to carry out the work and it is being done under very difficult circumstances. As we are only allowed to do the physical work on the railway at weekends, we are working ——

Mr. Leahy

Perhaps the Deputy will allow me to finish my point first and then I will answer that question. We are working hard, trying to ensure the execution of a very large project, within a very short timeframe of two years and we can only work at weekends. The Deputy wishes to know why we do not work at night and I will come back to that point in a moment.

I have outlined the realities. The priority is to provide an improved DART service and we have done that, as Mr. Fearn pointed out. When the DART was introduced in 1984, 21 years ago, it was operating four-car train sets with a maximum of 12 per hour. That gave it a capacity of 8,000 passengers per hour. The DART service has been improved by a switch to six-car train sets. We have squeezed as much into the existing system as is possible. The requirement is to increase capacity further.

However, increasing platform lengths is not as simple as that, as some people think. It also involves work on the track, the overhead line equipment and the sub-stations to cater for longer trains. That is our current programme which will bring capacity from 8,000 passengers per hour up to 16,000 per hour.

To implement this project, provide a 30% increase over the DART's current capacity and to double what it started with in two years while only being allowed to work at weekends, only north or south of the line at any one time, while providing concessions during the Christmas period and for special events is an achievement. The company has been very successful in its achievements to date and this project will be completed within the timeframe and budget. That is a real achievement.

To answer the question as to why the work was not carried out at night, the last DART trains run at midnight. If the project workers wish to go on site with bulldozers and earth-moving equipment, they need at least two hours to comply with normal safety precautions to ensure that the railway line is broken, the overhead line wires are fully disconnected and that all safety procedures are in place. As the DART service resumes again at 6 a.m., the system must be handed back by then. That leaves the project workers only a couple of hours in the middle of the night to carry out the work, which is simply not possible.

With the future project, DASH phase two, which relates to the signalling, we are not talking about the same type of operation. We are not talking about physically moving onto the railway line, putting bulldozers on the platforms or having earth-moving equipment everywhere. We are talking about a signalling system, which is an entirely different type of operation, that can be done differently from the platform project.

Did it involve suspension of services?

Mr. Leahy

I did not say that.

Can Mr. Leahy clarify this?

Mr. Leahy

There is no commitment for DASH phase two. The Government and the board of CIE may not wish to proceed with it. If they do, we will be able to deliver a further 30% increase, bringing passenger numbers from the original 8,000 passengers per hour up to 21,000 passengers per hour when the signalling is completed. We are designing a system so that it can be done without any impediment to weekday and weekend services. However, I reiterate that it is a different operation.

Mr. Fearn

My colleague, Mr. Ray Kelly, shall pick up some of the issues of consultation, a key element of this process.

Meetings were held, as Deputy Andrews is aware. While I was not at them, my colleagues were and I know what went on at them. These meetings have been taking place since March. We began an information campaign on the trains and in the stations at least at fortnight ago. Posters have been put up on the trains and at stations setting out the schedule for June and July. On my way to this meeting, I counted six posters at Pearse Station which have been there for more than two weeks. We have printed 200,000 leaflets that have set out bus arrangements.

May I see a copy of the leaflet?

I shall circulate some among the committee.

Politicians can deliver them to houses at the weekend.

It was a planned drop.

I use the DART but I have not seen any of them.

Allow Mr. Kelly speak without interruption.

The Dalkey Community Council dropped 4,000 leaflets to houses last week. I will accept anyone's offer to help me drop these leaflets. Joking aside, the campaign is in place. Dublin Bus, in conjunction with ourselves, placed an advertisement in the newspapers this morning and for tomorrow. Some 300 posters will be placed on DART carriages and 200 on the bulkheads of buses.

A critical element to an information campaign is timing. People can claim it should have been done two months ago. However, that could mislead people. It is better to give the campaign a two week sustained burst to ensure people are not confused. However, this is a matter of opinion.

I am assured by the professional marketing house employed for this that 50,000 leaflets have been distributed over the last several days. We have been in touch with the Dalkey heritage group and one will see that the Dalkey bus is included in the campaign. At individual stations over the next weekend, notices for the nearest bus stop will be displayed. The No. 145 service to Bray is a new service that will be doubled over Saturdays and Sundays and will run every 15 minutes from Parnell Square along the quality bus corridor. We are meeting representatives of the Bray traders tomorrow to discuss co-operative advertising. We have some ideas on how to put across a positive message rather than a negative one. Slogans will include: "Do not worry, we will get you there. You can still travel to the south side". This is the second of such meetings.

We will co-operate with every group that so wishes. We will offer advertising on buses and trains for specific events. We are committed to work closely with the organisers of the Ferris wheel event and the airshow. For any other event affected by our services which requires support, we will provide advertising space, distribute leaflets at stations and whatever else can be done in a reasonable commercial sense. Some radio advertising is planned. We work closely with AA Roadwatch, which mentioned last week that there would be some south side DART closures this week. We find the service very useful. Since last week, the customer information system at stations has flagged the upcoming closures for south side DART services. Announcements have also been made through the PA system. Staff will be retained in city centre stations to direct and provide information on bus services to tourists or people from the country unaware of the closures.

Mr. Declan Murray

I can assure Deputy McManus that the buses coming on over the weekend are additional. There will be no impact on services anywhere else in the city. These are additional services that we normally operate on Monday to Friday but which do not operate on Saturday and Sunday. They will be taken out for the weekend. To give an indication of the level of patronage we expect, particularly as Deputy Fiona O'Malley referred to overcrowding, we carried on average 25,000 additional people during the last closure. Dublin Bus will provide 32,000 additional seats over these weekends. We do not see overcrowding becoming a significant issue.

Deputy Andrews pointed out that there is already a service for Dalkey. A service will be provided in conjunction with the Dalkey heritage organisation from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. on the hour every hour from Dalkey and from Dublin city centre, serving all stations from Dalkey to Dún Laoghaire, Blackrock, St. Vincent's Hospital, Ballsbridge and all stops to the city centre. It is designed to provide as fast a connection as possible. The No. 145 service is our new quality bus corridor service from Kilmacanogue, on the far side of Bray, to Mountjoy Square. It will be increased by 100% to provide a 15 minute service directly through the city centre business district to Mountjoy Square for every weekend the DART is suspended.

Dublin Bus has consistently supported and sponsored the Dún Laoghaire Festival of World Cultures. People involved in the festival are aware that Dublin Bus has provided late night buses in the past and will do so again this year. Routes generally affected within the Dublin Bus network will be routes Nos. 7, 145, 46A, the new Dalkey shuttle, 45, 45A, 84 and 59. Dublin Bus will concentrate on these routes to provide additional services. This weekend we will be providing a unique shuttle service from O'Connell Street to Lansdowne Road, both before and after the international football match.

It was claimed it would be done within two years. This conflicts with what the delegation said regarding the delayed stations.

Mr. Leahy

No. The work started in late October 2003. The object of the upgrade is to cater for the longer trains and the increased passenger handling capacity. By September 2005, we will have the capacity to handle eight-car trains. Am I misleading the Deputy?

Mr. Leahy is speaking about two different matters.

Mr. Leahy

My point is that it is within the two-year timeframe. We began in October 2003.

However, that concerns extended services. The issue of disabled access is a separate item.

Mr. Leahy

Yes, there are some stations we were unable to complete. It was never our intention not to complete them. It was our intention that all the stations would be completed. However, we have hit various problems with planning, An Taisce and property issues. Our expectation is that the project will be finished within the two-year timeframe.

Is that the answer to my question?

Mr. Leahy

Deputy Mitchell asked if there are a number of stations for which disabled access will not be provided because of planning issues, and if they would be attended to in the future.

Mr. Leahy

Far be it from me to contradict what the Iarnród Éireann chairman is going to say——

What the chairman has said.

Mr. Leahy

Deputy Mitchell quoted the chairman. We have already entered into contracts to provide disabled access at all stations. As we are restricted in providing it, we had to block the contractor from carrying out that work. However, we will insist that he do all the work he can do. This will entail foundations, pilings and so on, most of which is the kind of disruptive work which necessitates blockages at the weekend. Though I cannot guarantee this, there is a good possibility that the remaining works could be done — or at least will prove less disruptive to carry out. At all stations we will have done a considerable amount of work for the provision of disabled access. The only work not done will be that which planning restrictions will not allow us do — the bits that stick up in the air, so to speak.

When is it proposed to finish the job?

Mr. Leahy

The project must be closed out at the end of the two-year period, and will be, with some of the works unfinished because of the planning issues.

Two years from now?

Mr. Leahy

No. The two-year programme ends in October of this year.

Where is that written in stone? Is it written into the contract with the builder?

Mr. Leahy

In the past, I have appeared before an Oireachtas sub-committee because projects ran over time and budget.

Is Mr. Leahy talking of a building contract?

Mr. Leahy

When we enter into contracts, it is imperative that we do not change their scope, that projects are delivered within the timeframe and within budget.

Does the organisation have a two-year contract with the builder?

Mr. Leahy

Yes. It must finish by October, but I do not rule out the possibility or the likelihood of completing the work, because I do not think it will be very substantial.

Mr. Leahy is saying that the contract runs out in October. After that, whatever is left to be done must be done under a separate contract. It cannot be included in the current contract.

I am sure that planning permission is needed for foundations.

I hoped we might spend a little time on issues in the rest of the country.

We will do so when we finish with this issue.

Are we finished discussing the DART?

My question about what alternatives were explored was not answered. Where is work starting on Saturday? Could the service have been closed north or south of Dún Laoghaire instead of making everyone suffer so much? I refer in particular to the possible use of diesel trains.

Mr. Leahy

If all works that remain to be done on the south side were attended to, that would take 14 weekends, as we see it. If we were to phase that work——

What alternatives were explored? Was the use of diesel trains considered?

Mr. Leahy

Is the Deputy talking of when the project was started?

No. I am talking about the situation from tomorrow.

Mr. Leahy

We cannot alter the scope of work on projects entered into two years ago.

I am not talking about the work, but the service.

There is some confusion here.

It is reasonable to ask——

We have extended Deputy O'Malley the courtesy of——

It is reasonable to ask if diesel trains could be run next weekend.

My understanding is that the diesel train would have to use the same station, which would not be practical.

The service was suspended because the power needs to be cut off. The diesel train does not need power.

Mr. Fearn

From the outset, various options were considered, one being the complete closure, including closure on weekdays, in order to finish the project much more quickly, but that would have been very disruptive to customers. Another option was to take a much longer period, doing small bits of work at a time. We concluded with what Mr. Leahy has described, and contracts were than drawn up. As Mr. Leahy explained clearly, we have to stick to that.

This is the only opportunity we get to ask these people questions. I am merely asking——

Everyone else has questions to ask too.

Deputy O'Malley is being anything but courteous to the witnesses from Iarnród Éireann and to the other permanent members of the committee who have waited here all day to raise other questions. Mr. Leahy answered the Deputy's question in pointing out that diesel trains cannot be operated. The question has been answered three times.

I ask forgiveness if I have come across as discourteous. I am just frustrated.

Like the commuters.

It is all in a good cause. We now move on to the overall rail upgrade programme.

I was critical, but I am impressed by the presentation made by these gentlemen. It was professional, courteous and factual, and I have learned a great deal. I compliment the gentlemen on their submission.

Senator Norris took my clothes from the end of the meeting.

Deputy O'Malley is frustrated and the Chairman is naked. I am glad I am on this committee. Next year I will attend its Christmas dinner party rather than that of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs.

The Senator must ensure he gets an invitation.

Some months before the project started, all Dáil Members were invited to meet representatives of Iarnród Éireann to look at detailed plans regarding the Deputies' constituencies. Had Members availed of that opportunity then, it might have saved us a lot of time.

I agree.

I wish to ask about the upgrade programme generally. The Labour Party held its national conference in Tralee last weekend and I undertook to relay a large number of complaints which I got from party members about the conditions they had to endure when travelling from Dublin to Tralee on a train which was very old and dilapidated, with poor toilet facilities and no dining facilities, without even tea or coffee available. For the privilege of going on that return journey, the cost was €57. The witnesses are talking of new rail cars for the Cork-Dublin line. When will they be in a position to upgrade the rail cars on the Tralee line?

Some Labour Party members were clever enough to take a flight to Tralee. A return flight, in great comfort and in a fraction of the time taken by the train, costs a mere €58. How does Iarnród Éireann expect to compete with internal flights when the travelling conditions are as poor as they are on some of the routes, and the fares as high as they are?

I wish to ask the witnesses about some of the planned projects, such as the Dartry signalling project, the additional capacity in the central area, work on the Kildare line and the spur to Dunboyne. These are four much-awaited and long overdue developments. Has Government funding been guaranteed for these projects? What is the timescale for their delivery?

I would also like to know about the integrated rail plan, involving the interconnector tunnel, to vastly increase capacity within the city centre. We all hope and expect that project will be included in the famous ten-year transport plan which the Minister is shortly due to announce. What is the timescale for delivering the project? What percentage capacity increase will it deliver to the network, assuming the Minister will give the go-ahead for the complete job to be done?

I have several questions but will concentrate on two issues, the investment programme and the interconnector. I understand the extension of the Maynooth line to a new station beyond Connolly station, which would allow additional capacity on both the Maynooth line and the DART, is being held up owing to a lack of clarity on the location of the new station. Has a decision been taken on the location of the new station at Spencer Dock or on land owned by Iarnród Éireann? Making that decision is a priority for Dublin services. While the line across the Liffey and up to Heuston Station would improve the existing commuter service, it does not provide a new service and I am less convinced of the priority that should be given to that decision. Given that the Government is spending €750 million on the port tunnel to take traffic off the quays, it seems strange to dig under them to provide an underground train service. It is not that I do not consider it a worthy project in the longer term, but in terms of priority where does it fall? Are there other proposed commuter services in the Dublin area that have a higher priority rating?

An issue that I am asked about as a local Deputy and Opposition spokesperson on transport is the provision of feeder services to trains, the DART or Luas. It seems the three strands of CIE, Bus Átha Cliath, Bus Éireann and Iarnród Éireann, compete with each other and do not synchronise their services. People say they would use the DART and train if they could get a bus into the station and not be dependent on a car.

I understand that CIE sees its main task is to provide a safe service. While the ultimate safe service is one with no passengers, one must attract passengers, however. It seems that Bus Éireann and Bus Átha Cliath see themselves in competition with Iarnród Éireann because providing feeder services for it does not seem to be a priority for them.

I welcome the delegation and I thank Mr. Fearn for his presentation. It seems the north-siders are always last and I hope we will be more direct in our questioning than our south-side colleagues. Will the delegation confirm that the northern phase of the DART refurbishment programme is completed?

Mr. Leahy

The works will be ongoing during the summer but there will be no disruption to services.

Does Mr. Leahy anticipate further disruption?

Mr. Leahy

There will be no further disruption.

I have a number of queries on the presentation. First, on the question of vending machines, while I understand 100 have been installed and a further 50 will come on stream, will the installation of further machines be subject to critical mass at each point of sale? Are these machines efficient and how do they contribute to the operation of the service.

In the presentation it states the commuter rail car fleet is being increased from 17 to 144. I do not know if that is a misprint, but I would be interested to know when the company had 17 rail cars in its commuter fleet?

There is a reference to DART resignalling to increase central area capacity and additional terminal capacity in the central area of Dublin. Will the delegates elaborate on what both those projects involve, the increase in capacity, how long it will take and if it will cause disruption to services? If there is a disruption in the city centre, both south-side and north-side services will be out of sync at the same time.

Paragraph 2.7 states that design works will take place between 2005 and 2006 and physical works will take place in 2006 to early 2008. Is there a way to expedite this work?

The suburban rail service, separate from the DART, was not covered in the presentation. Are the delegates aware of the extent of the overcrowding on the Drogheda suburban commuter line? To realise the extent of overcrowding, one must use the service at rush hour. My flippant response to a colleague who asked me about the situation is that it is so bad that the next step will be people sitting on the roof like in Calcutta. Deputy Sargent stated earlier that people are withdrawing from the service because of the overcrowding. People are moving out of the area because of the overcrowding. It is a major problem. One can only get a handle on the situation if one uses the morning service at peak times. Population projections have been done for Donabate to Drogheda and the increase is outlandish, yet there is no suggestion of a proportionate increase in capacity on the rail line. I would like the delegation to comment on this. In my view, a serious accident on the Drogheda suburban line is not far off.

I have a number of questions. Is the upgrade of Kent Station in Cork at the planning stage, are there plans for the nearby property, how much will it cost and what is the timescale involved? Is the extension to Midleton station on schedule and when will CIE be in a position to put the plans on public display? Will it be opened at the end of 2007, as promised?

I use the train a great deal and the staff are courteous at the station and on the train. I know that staff often work under difficult conditions and it is important that there is a programme in place for the ongoing training of staff.

Will the delegates examine the provision of car parking at Cork station? People must wait in the rain on occasion to get a ticket to park but it only allows one to park for up to two days. If one is away for more than two days, a large sticker is placed on the window of one's vehicle. Shoppers and other non-commuting motorists are using Iarnród Éireann's car parks because they are less expensive than other parking facilities. This is an issue that should be considered as part of the upgrade.

What plans does Iarnród Éireann have to provide integrated ticketing services for passengers who disembark at Heuston Station before travelling by bus to their destination? Is it intended that such passengers will be able to purchase one ticket that can be used for the separate elements of their journey? Such a system would alleviate delays for commuters. What plans are there to integrate bus and train services in Cork city?

Is the funding for the Midleton extension in place and what is the cost of this project? I understand there is no storage facility for luggage at Kent Station in Cork. This is another matter for consideration because passengers find the absence of this facility inconvenient. What is the position regarding the transport of freight? I am informed by some industrialists that it seems to be Iarnród Éireann's policy to carry less freight.

It seems the life of a Progressive Democrats Senator involves waiting until the very end before he or she is called.

Senator Morrissey has not been left until the end.

Senator Morrissey has the honour of getting here without any hassle, unlike other members.

Must I be continually reminded of this? I understand the new service from Clonsilla to Connolly Station, which will involve a new eight-carriage train, is due to start in December. Will the delegation give an assurance that this service will commence from Clonsilla? We are all aware that there are problems with Clonsilla Station in terms of access. The easiest solution would be to move this new service further out to Leixlip or elsewhere. However, Clonsilla is the pinch-point of population growth and passengers experience serious difficulties in boarding the train at that station. It becomes even more difficult to board when the train reaches Castleknock and Coolmine.

When this new service was originally discussed two years ago, the plan was that it should operate twice every hour, skip Drumcondra in the morning and arrive at platform No. 7 at Connolly Station. This seems the most effective use of this resource. It is not sensible to introduce a new eight-carriage train which will provide only one service in the morning. By skipping Drumcondra and utilising the old disused line into platform No. 7, the train will be able to get back out of Connolly Station and service a second load of passengers from Clonsilla.

What about passengers travelling from Drumcondra?

Drumcondra already enjoys the benefits of three existing services and passengers using that station have a good choice. By using the disused line into Connolly Station, passengers can disembark at that point and change over to the eight-carriage DART which will empty out at Connolly.

Serious consideration should be given to this option. We have discussed the means by which Dublin Bus is co-operating with Iarnród Éireannto facilitate integration between rail and bus services. There is no reason this cannot happen at Clonsilla Station and planning in this regard must begin now. Even one train per hour on the new service will accommodate some 1,200 extra passengers. No parking is available at Clonsilla Station, it is located at a dangerous bridge and no proper pedestrian access will be in place by December. A proper feeder bus service must be established for the entire Clonsilla area while construction is under way. If such a service can be provided during the DART upgrade works, there is no reason it cannot also be done for the suburban line.

Finally, the incoming train on the western line is obliged to stop near Croke Park in the mornings before making its final approach to Connolly Station to allow the north-bound DART to reach Fairview. Is it planned to cease this practice soon or must we await further upgrading projects?

I welcome the delegation. A statement was issue by the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, on 31 January in which he observed that demands on the rail network in the greater Dublin area have increased greatly in recent years and that people living in towns such as Kildare, Naas, Maynooth, Leixlip, Castleknock, Drogheda, Balbriggan and Skerries must have access to a reliable train service into the city. He went on to announce that 36 new rail carriages will deliver an improved service for 5,000 passengers per day. What increased capacity will these new carriages provide for commuters from Donabate to Drogheda?

I understand that the current capacity through Connolly Station to Pearse Station is 12 trains per hour at peak periods. Will the delegation confirm that the proposed resignalling works will facilitate an increase in this figure to 16? On the basis of this increased capacity, how many extra trains per hour will operate on the northern route at peak times? Does the delegation accept that any further capacity increase after 2008 for the long-suffering commuters on the northern route, who have bought houses in north Dublin on the basis of the availability of an effective rail network for the area, will hinge on the development of a new rail station at Spencer Dock and a tunnel from there through Connolly Station? Has the Government given a commitment in regard to the funding that is required for these projects, which are vital in ensuring that commuters from the growth areas of north Dublin, Kildare and Meath can access Dublin city?

It was an interesting presentation. My questions relate to a number of aspects of the northern suburban line. I thank the delegation for the work that has been done in providing bicycle parking facilities. It is clear that such facilities are much in demand and there has been a good take-up. However, a lack of security means the take-up has not been as good as it might. There is a general nervousness, especially among commuters who work until late in the evening, that bicycles are left unattended in the hours of darkness or when stations are less busy.

The accessibility work that has been carried out has opened up opportunities for persons with disabilities travelling to and from Dublin, Drogheda and other areas. When did Iarnród Éireann last have a meeting with the stakeholders who are part of the consultation in this regard, including representatives of those with a visual or mobility impairment? I understand a meeting was cancelled before Christmas. Will the delegation confirm that this is not being left on the long finger and that it appreciates the importance of keeping a constant and vigilant watch on the maintenance of lifts and other facilities on which persons with a disability are dependent? What progress has been made with regard to the long-promised integrated ticketing? A question was asked about integration between bus and train tickets and areas such as Donabate, Rush, Lusk and Skerries would be well served by such integration. Are there impediments to improving the situation and is Iarnród Éireann seeking to overcome them? Does it have any planned announcements in that respect?

What is the delegation's view on the DART extension north of Malahide in terms of timeframe, costs and expectation? The subject regularly crops up. Has Iarnród Éireann evaluated the detail of the proposal? Is Iarnród Éireann in any discussions with Drogheda Port regarding the proposal which has been floated for a large port development in Bremore north of Balbriggan? Its situation adjacent to a railway line has been cited as a major contributing factor to the decision. What discussions have taken place and have any conclusions been reached?

Mr. Fearn

There are a few questions, but we have made some notes.

We can return to any questions which delegates cannot answer.

Mr. Fearn

I think we can handle most of them. I will start by addressing the questions relating to services in counties Cork and Kerry. I will hand over to Mr. Tom Finn to talk about longer-term schemes and strategic capacity announcements, particularly in the Dublin area. Mr. Ray Kelly will address the issues of ticketing and accessibility and Mr. Joe Leahy will answer questions on the phase two DART extension.

There are many positive points to make about services in Cork and Kerry, particularly with regard to the Cork station development and associated developments around Horgan's Quay and improvements to the existing Kent Station. All of the developments are linked and it has been crucial for us to understand what is required in terms of additional services — for example, with regard to the opening of the Midleton line — before signing off on how much land could be given up for development and sold out of railway use as well as taking account of the changed arrangements in terms of access to the station in Cork. These developments are progressing very well and there is a positive tone in Cork city, especially regarding the Midleton line. In anticipation of local and national funding, we will be setting out the necessary railway order legislation process to enable us to carry out these developments.

We are developing Cork Kent Station and the main entrance will be on the Horgan's Quay side. This will have huge benefits, significantly improve the main accessibility to the station and enable a bus integration area in front of the station for incoming services from west Cork and other areas. In the meantime, there are matters which we can go ahead with and address. A very small works programme is planned which will improve the environment around the station and the overall customer service which we can provide within the existing surroundings. However, the real benefits will come from the opening of the Midleton route, the resulting new services, the new station development and the change to the station entrance.

This is all being undertaken in anticipation of local and national funding for the Midleton route. I cannot point to a piece of paper which states that the funding is available. However, positive steps are being taken. Detailed plans are expected to be in place by the end of 2005. We were asked about an official launch of the scheme and we should be able to announce plans for Cork Kent Station and the complete redevelopment of the Midleton line by the end of this year.

The rolling stock being used on the Tralee service is expired and unsatisfactory. That is why we have been moving from investment in infrastructure to the replacement of rolling stock. These stages are committed and we can be very firm that they will all happen. The first of the new InterCity trains for the Dublin Cork route will be delivered during the next two months. They will be commissioned and deliveries will take place over the next eight to ten months taking us through into late spring 2006. By then we will have a complete fleet of trains, every single train on the Dublin-Cork route will be brand new rolling stock and the frequency of the service will be enhanced. All trains will call at Mallow and will then connect with improved frequency of services in and out of County Kerry. We will still run through trains from Kerry.

We have recently resignalled the line from Mallow to Tralee which gives us a good foundation. The track and signalling have been renewed and we must now get new rolling stock and increase the frequency of the service. Some of the trains will be rail cars which will connect with the InterCity services at Mallow for Dublin. However, there will be much more choice because there will be more services between Mallow and Dublin and more shuttles. Some trains will run all the way from Tralee to Dublin. Those trains will also be replaced in the order for 120 InterCity rail cars which will be delivered over the course of 2007. This means that every train which operates either through to Kerry or via Mallow will be modern rolling stock in approximately two and a half years. The combination of improvements to the infrastructure, including the signalling, frequency of service and quality of rolling stock, will mean a radically different perception. We are a long way from that in the minds of passengers who use the Kerry line at this time. However, we are very close to witnessing the first steps towards these improvements. None of this is on the basis of a wish list, the hope that it will happen or that we will get funding. It is all committed, contracts have been drawn up and rolling stock is either being delivered or close to being so.

We must return to the longer-term developments for the Dublin area.

I asked about the level of fares given the current poor quality of service. The year 2007 is a long time for people to wait. How can Iarnród Éireann compete with air travel considering the level of fares?

Mr. Fearn

We cannot get into a price war with air travel. Our services are in accordance with a network of fares based on the distance travelled and availability of the fare. Some fares are cheaper but more restricted than others. Regarding the fares quoted by the Deputy, the speed of air travel might encourage some people to take that option. However, we carry a lot more people between Kerry and Dublin than do the relatively few flights available. We should not get into a price war with the airlines. Our objective is to improve quality of service and concentrate on rail. Improvements will come about and are guaranteed through the investments which I have discussed. People will then regard our fares as good value for money.

Mr. Finn

A number of wider questions were asked about the Dublin area in general upon which I will concentrate for the moment. The key aspect running through all the questions is when funding will be provided. Not long ago, we operated on an annual cycle of funding. Therefore, it was difficult to plan ahead. We are now fortunate in that we have moved towards a five year planning framework, which is currently in place. Most of the projects which we have discussed and which were outlined in Mr. Fearn's presentation for the short term could be accommodated within our five year programme. However, as many members will be aware, the ten year programme, of which the Minister has been speaking recently and which is due to be published shortly, marks a change. As anyone involved in public transport knows that two, three or five years are short-term periods in our line of work, one must begin to think in the longer term. This has begun to shape many of our thoughts about what we should do and when we should do it.

However, we are quite confident that the elements we have discussed will be accommodated within the short five year timeframe. The question of when the interconnector begins is critical. It will shape many of our thoughts concerning when or if Spencer Dock arises or whether we should go for the tunnel solution immediately. I do not wish to go into each of the detailed questions. Nevertheless, Mr. Fearn might wish to respond to some of the more detailed timetabling issues with regard to some of the projects, such as the Maynooth line.

Mr. Fearn

Specifically, on the question on the Maynooth line timetable and the additional train which is due to come into service in December, new rolling stock will be available for additional trains. The new rolling stock consists of 36 new commuter diesel multiple units, DMUs, the first set of which will be delivered towards the end of this month, when we anticipate the first delivery from CAF in Spain. The new units will go to Drogheda for commissioning purposes and deliveries will continue throughout the autumn, with a total of 36 to be delivered. By December, we will be in a position to include them in our service pattern.

We will do this in a couple of ways and I can answer two questions on the subject. First, we will look for the additional service on the Maynooth line and I agree that we want to get maximum use out of it. The skill of our timetablers will be used to try to maximise the possible use of the additional rolling stock during the peak period. Moreover, we will also try to do the same with the Drogheda line.

I fully appreciate this issue. I live on the DART line and travel on the DART every day. While I do not live on the Drogheda line, many of my colleagues do so and I receive first hand reports in the office on a daily basis. I am very familiar with the level of demand which currently exceeds the supply we can offer. Approximately 18 months ago, we increased capacity by 33%, which was soaked up straight away. This demonstrates the underlying level of demand. We will be able to do more with the next delivery of rolling stock and our commitment is to do so. However, at present, we must use the existing infrastructure.

Some benefits have arisen from phase one of the DART and suburban enhancement project, DASH. One is the ability to terminate a train on platform No. 7 of Connolly Station and to turn. These matters will be examined. I do not wish to try to write timetables in public across the meeting room, as it is very difficult to do. However, Iarnród Éireann's timetablers are currently attempting to schedule the use of the trains where demand is greatest.

In the context of the extra carriages and on the basis of the existing infrastructure, Iarnród Éireann hopes to get an extra train at peak period to Kildare and hopes to get an extra train at peak period on the northern line. Is that correct?

Mr. Fearn

Yes, to Maynooth and on the northern line.

Will this be done before the end of the year?

Mr. Fearn

At the end of the year, as part of the December timetable.

All right. That is good and clarifies matters.

Mr. Fearn

Mr. Leahy will now discuss the answers to the questions about the DASH project resignalling in greater detail.

Mr. Leahy

Deputy Glennon asked when work would commence and whether funding was available. We do not have funding on the table but there is great expectation there will be. There is little doubt, because of what can be delivered by phase two of the DASH project. In terms of capacity, like phase one of the DASH project, it will deliver another 33% increase and will probably cost less. We must refine some of the methods with which we will carry it out. Undoubtedly, the requirement to carry out phase two without any interruption to service will have a further cost implication, whereas phase one could not be done without service interruption, irrespective of whether extra money was thrown at the problem. The design phase will start this summer and we will assemble a design team specifically to examine phase two of the DASH project. We anticipate there will be a duration of approximately 12 months before the design phase is in place and we have worked out our costings accurately, because we must examine the signalling issue quite radically. I estimate that by this time next year, we will be in a position to go forward with a proposal to the board for implementation. We have stated that the end of 2008 is a reasonable expectation.

Assuming that the integrated rail plan will be included in the Government's ten year plan, what is the timescale for delivering that project? What additional capacity will it make available?

Mr. Finn

As to the question on additional capacity, if the total plan as we envisaged it is in place, we can quadruple capacity. At present, we carry approximately 25 million and we can increase that to 100 million. As far as the timescale is concerned, it is outside of our direct control, but the entire plan will certainly take more than ten years. However, the benefit of what we are attempting to achieve is that it can all be done in phases and each phase will have benefits and will complement the final stage. Hence, if we do something on the Maynooth line or on the Kildare line that fits into the final plan, both will add benefits as they are implemented in phases.

I asked three questions, none of which has been answered.

The witnesses will return to them.

Mr. Finn stated that he did not intend to go into detail. I asked a specific question and I want a specific answer. I am asking about the Connolly Station bypass, for want of a better description. The last time I received a briefing, I was informed there were some problems about whether the Spencer Dock project would go through and if in fact a new station could be provided on CIE land. Perhaps this project will occur some time in the future or will it ever happen? Is it in the five year programme or has it suddenly become something——

Mr. Finn

I presume the Deputy's question refers to the issue of the additional terminal and when and where it should be developed.

Has it moved forward?

Mr. Finn

No it has not moved forward. As with everything under discussion today, we must wait to see what is in the ten year programme. As I have stated, the ultimate ten year programme will have a major impact on what is done in the short term. In other words, if the tunnel from Spencer Dock to Heuston Station is included in the plan, it makes sense to put in the station and to dig the tunnel at the same time. However, if it were to be significantly delayed, one would build an interim station. It is a question of weighing up which is the best location in the short term for an interim station. Assuming that we know what is in the plan, we will be able to make our decision the next couple of months.

Can the witnesses comment on my question concerning the priority for the interconnector and the other tunnel up to Heuston? It appears to involve a great deal of money.

Mr. Finn

It may seem to be a lot of money in the Deputy's eyes but it is critical to Iarnród Éireann in terms of delivering a fourfold increase in what we do. Effectively, it gives us another line across the city. We keep talking about the capacity we have on the existing line and what we can do. The other great thing about it is the interconnectivity it can give in terms of trying to bring passengers from Portlaoise and Athlone right through to the city centre and connecting them up to other parts of the network. The question of integration and pulling the services together is key to what we are trying to achieve.

Does Mr. Finn not see my point that we have spent €750million on a port tunnel to get traffic off the quays, put in a Luas line up the quays but are now going to build a tunnel under the quays?

Mr. Finn

No.

That in effect is what is happening. I understand that it will increase Iarnród Éireann's carrying capacity and will give a much better service to the people who already have a service but it does not do anything to increase the overall rail network within Dublin. I am not saying that it is not highly necessary; I am just asking whether, in terms of priorities, the €1 billion should be spent on that.

To be fair to Mr. Finn, he said it was the equivalent of giving Iarnród Éireann an extra rail line in the city. The tunnel would provide that because it means people could go from one station to another without having to disembark.

What about existing passengers?

Mr. Fearn

This will give us a significant additional new railway. At the moment, the railways we have been talking about that come down from Drogheda and the North and in from Maynooth, and the DART line that comes in from Howth and Malahide, all have to go into Connolly Station. If they want to go further, they all have to go through the narrow chicane of Tara Street to Pearse Station. The beauty of the new tunnel at Spencer Dock and a tunnel under the city with stations in locations like St. Stephen's Green right under the centre of the city, which would emerge at Heuston Station and out on to the main line to the south west, means that plenty of new services can operate that do not have to go anywhere Connolly, Tara Street or Pearse Stations. Therefore, it is a huge chunk of additional capacity. It is no good opening new railways to places like Dunboyne, the M3 interchange and so on without having anywhere to put the trains when they get into the city. This is a huge piece of additional infrastructure. Anybody who is keen on railways and rail solutions to transport problems in this city should support this interconnector. It is not a facility that would be nice to have; it is an absolutely essential ingredient to give us more capacity in the city centre.

Who is it serving precisely?

Mr. Fearn

It is serving everybody because the trains that still go through Connolly and Tara Street——

The suburban routes.

Mr. Fearn

It will not just serve the suburban routes.

It will serve the outer suburban routes that already have a service; that is the point I am making. Are there not other ways of transporting them within the city?

Many people do not have a service.

I know many people do not have a service, that is my point.

We have one extra train on the basis of the 36 carriages. The other specific question I asked is how many extra trains will that provide on the northern line at peak period when the electrification comes into place in 2007?

Mr. Finn

Does Deputy Ryan's question concern resignalling?

Mr. Finn

Resignalling will give us four additional paths per peak hour.

Will they go through Connolly or——

Mr. Finn

They will go across the bridge.

Would that be one for the northern line?

Mr. Finn

No, it depends on how exactly they are shared but we will see the bulk of these going to the northern line because that is where the bulk of the demand is.

Senator Morrissey will not be happy.

I take it that Iarnród Éireann is also doing the Dunboyne line, which will require a few paths.

Mr. Finn

Yes.

That is three extra.

We will end up with a rail crash as a result of everyone looking for too many trains. I would like to thank Mr. Fearn, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Finn and Mr. Martin.

People with disabilities have not got a look-in yet today.

It is very short term.

I am the chairman of the rail users' group. We were forced to cancel a meeting in December 2004. We held it in January, we had another meeting in April and there is another meeting scheduled for July. This group is representative of all disabled groups. I have also set up a process whereby we meet the NDA regularly. We have already had a few meetings with it. We could look after disabled passengers better but we are looking after them as best we can.

That is a good answer.

I thank the delegation for giving such wide-ranging answers to so many awkward questions. The one thing we can all see from this is that Iarnród Éireann has moved an enormous distance from where it was three or four years ago.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

I think Iarnród Éireann is to be complimented on that. The amount of ongoing work that will make an enormous change to the entire rail system is only now beginning to show fruit.

Do not forget Dublin Bus.

Seeing that poor Mr. Murray was brought in to batten down the hatches if it got too rough on the south side, we would also like to wish him well. We also wish the former chief executive, Joe Maher, well. Mr. Maher was before this committee on a number of occasions and we ask the delegation to convey our best wishes to him on his new position with Dublin Bus. He has gone to the faster lane.

That concludes today's meeting of the committee. The Select Committee on Transport will meet at 2.30 p.m. on 15 June 2005 to discuss the 2005 Estimates for the Department of Transport.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.10 p.m. sine die.

Barr
Roinn