I welcome the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey.
European Council Meeting: Discussion with Minister for Transport.
Táim buíoch díot agus den choiste as an cuireadh a bheith anseo.
I take this opportunity to inform the joint committee of the business that will be transacted at the Transport Council meeting on 13 June and will be pleased to hear any views committee members may have on it. The meeting which will take place in Luxembourg has a full agenda featuring road, rail and aviation matters. We will also debate intermodal issues.
Item No. 7 deals with road transport. We will build on the discussions we had at the April Council meeting on three proposed regulations on access to the road haulage market, common rules on the occupation of road transport operators and access to international coach and bus markets. The proposed regulations aim to update and modernise the existing EU law on the regulation of the road transport operator sector, both haulage and passenger transport. Taken together, the regulations propose an electronic register containing information on all operators; a much greater level of co-operation and recognition between member states on good repute issues; and clarification on cabotage. Ireland is in general agreement with all three proposals.
Of particular interest will be the introduction of the national electronic register which will allow enforcement and licensing authorities in the European Union to share information through electronic databases. This will allow for easier detection of unlicensed and illegal hauliers as they travel throughout Europe. It will also facilitate better focused monitoring and enforcement against operators who repeatedly break the law in regard to driving and rest time, vehicle standards and speeding. The benefits for the road safety agenda are self-evident. Ireland is examining replacing our existing database and we will ensure the replacement will meet the requirements in this package.
Item No. 8 is a proposal for a directive on roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers. This proposal is essentially an exercise in consolidating the original directive and five subsequent amendments. As such, Ireland fully supports the proposal which will go a long way to simplifying and clarifying this aspect of Community law and make it more accessible to the ordinary citizen. The proposal was considered by the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny at its meeting on 27 May when it was agreed it did not warrant further scrutiny.
Item No. 9 is a communication from the Commission entitled "Multi-annual contracts for rail infrastructure quality". Item No. 10 is a progress report and policy debate on a revised proposal for a directive on the promotion of clean and energy efficient transport vehicles. I welcome action that supports the sustainable transport agenda. This directive not only seeks to raise awareness of energy and environmental impacts from road transport vehicles but also seeks to ensure these factors are taken into account by procurement agencies. Item No. 11 will invite discussion on the adoption of a Council decision to authorise the Commission to open negotiations on behalf of the European Community with the western Balkans on a treaty establishing a transport community.
Item No. 12 relates to the aviation sector. We will discuss two draft decisions authorising the Commission to negotiate with Australia and New Zealand on comprehensive air transport agreements which should provide opportunities for further development of services. Ireland supports both mandates for which there is also widespread support from member states. Australia is one of the most advanced nations with regard to the regulatory framework for aviation and market liberalisation and a key driver of such policies within its wider region. The recent EU-US open skies agreement provides a good example of the benefits of liberalisation in air transport markets. Since the provisional application of the open skies agreement in March, the transatlantic sector has seen an 8% increase in EU-US flights scheduled in the summer compared with 2007. Ireland has greatly benefited with the introduction of three new direct services to Dublin.
The Council will conclude with any other businesswhich includes an update from the Irish and UK delegations on the finalisation of the Ireland-UK functional air space block; preparation for the informal Council meeting in September under the incoming French Presidency; and information from the Presidency on the state of play with regard to the reduction of CO2 emissions from light duty vehicles.
I welcome the Minister and wish him well at the meeting on these important items. I do not believe I have a copy of all of them but I have had an opportunity to look at one or two of them.
Item No. 5 relates to the determination of airport charges in member states. The Minister referred to a common set of principles. With regard to the three national airports, what would be the position on any overhanging debt? There was a recent critical decision on Cork Airport and there is a development plan for Dublin Airport. There is a possibility that the three major airports will have significant debts, given their natural inclination to try to develop. Would this EU instrument or law impact on their ability to develop an efficient pricing model for charges?
Item No. 9 is an interesting proposal relating to the licensing provisions for coach and bus services. Will this legislation have to be passed at European level before the Minister will be in a position to bring forward the licensing Bill? In a few weeks this committee is due to consider the Dublin Transport Authority Bill for at least two full days. It will consider proposed amendments to the legislation, including amendments others and I propose to bring forward. Will it be necessary for the EU legislation to be passed before we can introduce licensing legislation?
With regard to item No. 12 and aviation generally, what are the Minister's current views on the cost of kerosene, aviation fuel and fuel generally? Has he or the Government been considering any measures regarding excise duty on motor fuels, in the pre-budgetary period from now into the autumn, to make it possible for Irish transport operators to continue to work efficiently? There is a huge amount of tax and excise duty on transport fuels. Yesterday, we read the report on Ryanair and other companies which have not hedged their fuel supply. They are now under enormous strain with regard to service provision and employment. Are the Department, the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach watching this development closely? The Minister might have to bring forward a policy proposal.
I welcome the Minister and wish him luck at the forthcoming meeting.
I wish to focus on two areas, the first of which is the Minister's briefing on the national electronic register for the haulage industry. Any measures that lead to better licensing in the industry would be welcome, particularly in the light of some of the concerns regarding the safety of some of the unlicensed vehicles using our roads. I believe this issue is dealt with under item No. 7. Does the Department have an idea of how many unlicensed hauliers or haulage vehicles are operating in Ireland? Second, the Minister has said we are considering replacing our existing database. What are the Department's views on the operation of the current database and what defects it might have? Third, the Minister has said implementation of the register will lead to better enforcement against operators who break the law. I understand how this register would help us to find out who the companies and individual drivers are but how does the Minister envisage such a system interacting with the Garda and the Department to lead to better enforcement?
There is much discussion and debate taking place about the rising price of fuel and the role of tax in that regard. Will that subject merit any discussion in the approaching meeting, particularly as President Sarkozy in France has raised the issue of what can be done with indirect taxation to better support the transport industry in the context of its costs and the role it plays in affecting the performance of the overall economy?
Deputy Broughan asked about airport charges. I do not expect this item to have a direct effect. The airport charges regime agreed to by the Council at its last meeting only affects Dublin Airport because of its size. I do not expect it to have a direct effect on Cork, Shannon or the regional airports. It does not give the European Union or anybody else the right to set the charges; therefore, it has no direct impact. It is not an interference with the charging regime at the airports, as each state will be able to look after its own airports.
Therefore, the regulator will have the same powers.
Yes. With regard to the cost of fuel, the increase in the price of petrol and diesel is obviously a huge concern for everybody. The fact that oil is currently around $130 a barrel feeds into all sorts of costs and expenses. The transport industry has been particularly hit by it and we have seen some examples of that in the aviation sector. It is also a concern for the haulage sector, particularly as almost 90% of our goods are carried by road. Many haulage companies are feeling extreme pressure but there is no plan in this area, nor is it something that the EU would take on lightly. There was a discussion yesterday at ECOFIN, which made it clear that reduced excise duties or taxes were not being contemplated in the current context. That is something that would have to be considered at budget time from a finance point of view.
From our own viewpoint, however, it is worth noting that our excise rates are among the lowest in Europe. Currently, we are certainly well below the European average. On the other hand, it is argued that if one starts reducing tax rates as oil prices, including diesel, rise, it is a further encouragement for people to keep putting prices up because the taxpayer and the Government will carry the can. While it is recognised that there are difficulties for the haulage industry, and consequently for those they serve, there is no Government discussion or decision on reducing tax or excise duty on fuel.
I do not have any accurate estimate of the number of unregistered hauliers. I have seen figures bandied about at various times but I do not know how accurate they are. One of the benefits of the national electronic register is that it will enable us to get a better fix on that. There was a problem at one stage when the Data Protection Commissioner deemed the data on all registered haulage operators on our database to be personal information. Consequently, we had to take it down. That is something we must deal with. I would have thought it was information for the benefit of the public so that legitimate, registered hauliers who pay their taxes and minimum wages would have a right to know who else was in the business, and whether they were legitimate. The register will help that, however, and we have supported this matter in detail.
I was asked how it will improve things. It will mean that there will be centralised data across the EU, which will keep accurate records of breaches of various rules on driving times, etc. It will enable a full picture to be visible to the enforcement agencies in each country. It is going in the direction we are trying to take concerning the mutual recognition of penalty points and disqualification. In that way, a haulage operator could not break the law here and escape penalty by returning to the Continent, or vice versa. The pooling of such electronic information will make it much easier to check the record of each haulier. That will be a help because it means that legitimate hauliers who are obeying the rules will not be subject to unfair competition from others who are not doing that.
As regards Nos. 7 and 8, what must we do now to fulfil our part of the bargain concerning HGV inspection? Our journalist colleagues often write about the gap and the inability of our HGV inspectors to take part in Garda road checks. The Minister has said that approximately half our heavy goods vehicles are stopped abroad by the authorities and are found to be defective. Therefore, half the vehicles registered here are found to be defective in other EU countries, particularly the UK. What can be done about this in the coming weeks? I understand we need to introduce either primary or secondary legislation to make this happen. Is it possible to do this soon?
I welcome the Minister and wish him well with the forthcoming meeting of the European Transport Council.
Will the electronic vehicle register be available in each country simultaneously, as trucks drive from one country to another? If illegal trucks travel here from elsewhere in Europe, they are breaking all the rules, including those relating to tacographs, minimum wages and insurance cover. The information should be available to our authorities, and vice versa, so that the data on any Irish trucks travelling through France, Germany, Poland or elsewhere would be available to the police immediately. Therefore the authorities would not be dealing retroactively with complaints dating back weeks. Such electronic data should effectively be available 24/7 in each of the EU's 27 member states. In that way, EU police authorities could immediately check whether vehicles are legal. If they have suspicions, they would not have to consult their counterparts abroad, perhaps waiting weeks for the relevant information.
The two points that have been raised are related in many respects. Deputy Broughan referred to the roadworthiness of vehicles. As we discussed previously, a report was commissioned by the Road Safety Authority on the roadworthiness of HGVs and the regime needed to ensure our standards were raised. That report was furnished to me at the end of last year. I have approved the report and its recommendations are now being implemented. During the course of last year's Estimates and the general budgetary process, the RSA received funding for the elements of the recommendations that are to be implemented this year, so that matter is moving ahead.
The Deputy's other specific point concerned the necessity for a legal basis for transport officers and it appears that primary legislation is required in that respect. An amendment was tabled to a Bill proposed by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to allow for that. I understand, however, that there may be a problem in inserting the amendment in the Bill concerned. The Bills Office raised an issue about it, which means that it cannot be taken in that Bill. I am examining alternatives, including trying to insert it in the Dublin Transport Authority Bill, provided it will not slow up that legislation.
It seems logical to include it in a transport Bill.
Yes. It was included in the Bill proposed by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to allow it to happen quickly because at the time the Dublin Transport Authority Bill was not finalised.
Deputy Kennedy has asked if this is real-time information. It is not. If somebody is caught in this jurisdiction in breach of regulations, the authorities here will have an obligation to report the matter to the country of origin where it will be recorded. We supported a move by the United Kingdom to have a more elaborate database capable of doing exactly what the Deputy indicated. We did not receive much more support. Some member states, in particular, the Netherlands and Germany, were strongly against it. They claimed it would give rise to a significantly increased administrative burden. While others might have felt it was a good idea, they considered that the thinking behind it was not as developed as it should be and rather than delay what we had, they went for the lesser of the two options.
There may be an opportunity in the future to make it a real-time information system.
That is exactly what will happen. I do not accept the administrative burden argument. If it was done on-line in real time, it would not be nearly as much of a burden as having to record the matter and separately despatch information on it.
Is one not dealing with reams of paper?
Yes.
On a point the Minister made, the value of such a package will be appreciated when there is the ability to put in place a common penalty points system across Europe, which means this information may be accessed and used across the Continent to ensure people obey the law. How far off are we from implementation of a common penalty points system for such vehicles? From the Minister's work in the European Union, what are the big obstacles to implementation of such a package?
We are still a long way off. That is an honest assessment. Probably the biggest single difficulty lies in the different legal systems in use. We also encounter difficulties in the release of data and information. From conversations I have had, even with officials in the UK Department for Transport, I know how difficult it is to get to a common penalty points system.
There are two other points about item No. 14. Incidentally, I thank the Minister for answering queries on a number of pieces of European legislation which were not directly related. On shipping, will the Council discuss anything to do with flag states?
No. That issue was discussed at the previous meeting.
On road safety, allied to Senator Donohoe's point, for whatever reason, the Government seems to have great difficulty with the change in the blood alcohol level from 0.8g/l to 0.5g/l. Does the Minister see any situation where there might be a pan-European approach to drink driving limits? When one looks at the limits imposed in the 27 countries, it is striking that, although some have a bad record on road safety, many countries in eastern Europe have moved to a zero limit for professional and ordinary drivers. In the bulk of the others the limit is 0.2g/l for ordinary drivers and zero for professional drivers. Does the Minister envisage a pan-European approach, given that Ireland and the United Kingdom are the only two countries, apart from Malta perhaps, hanging on to the 0.8g/l level?
The Deputy prefaced his remark by stating the Government seemed to have a difficulty; there is no difficulty. The recommendations have been made and the legislation must be drafted. I must bring proposals to the Government which has noted the recommendation made of 0.5g/l. There are no recommendations made on suitable penalties.
It would be welcome if a position was adopted right across Europe. There seems to be a strong commitment across Europe to keeping the issue of road safety to the forefront and to seeking maximum co-operation between member states. However, one again encounters a difficulty due to the different legal systems in place.
A few months ago I looked at this issue. If memory serves me correctly, Ireland and the United Kingdom are the only countries with a 0.8g/l limit; there are 12 or 13 others - members should not hold me to the number - with a limit of 0.5g/l, and a variety of others with either a 0.2g/l or a zero grammes per litre limit. Looking at the figures applicable across Europe, it is interesting that some of the countries to which the Deputy referred with a 0.5g/l limit, or a 0.2g/l limit, do not seem to have as good a record as ours. Some of this is down obviously to enforcement but some of it is also down to the penalties imposed. In one country with a 0.5 g/l limit the penalty is a fine and the removal of one's licence for 24 hours. We impose stringent penalties. Once one is over the 0.8g/l limit one's licence is revoked. We have a graduated system.
My point is that it is not just about the level, but about the penalties and acceptability. After the weekend we have had, I am not saying - as I do not know - there was drink involved in any of the accidents but, in general, 40% of accidents are drink or speed related.
I remind members that representatives of the Garda authorities and the Carriage Office are here. We must bring this discussion to a conclusion.
When I raised the issue with the Taoiseach last week, he reared up on me--
The Taoiseach would never do such a thing.
He stated I was giving the impression that there would be no change in the drink driving regulations until after the local elections this time next year. Is the Minister stating the decision on a 0.5g/l limit has been made and that it will be in force in the autumn?
The Government has noted the recommendation. I am drafting legislation on the basis of the recommendation I received. No decision will be taken until I bring back to it a proposal, including, if the limit is to be 0.5g/l in accordance with the recommendation made, the penalties to be imposed. We are only looking at half the picture.
Does the Minister accept the corollary in the context of complaints about the social structure of the country, whereby the allocation for rural transport services needs to be vastly increased? The Chairman invited a number of impressive groups to appear before the committee. I recall, for example, Kildare-Offaly Transport. Is it the case that the allocation needs to be greatly expanded? Should it not come under the Department of Transport rather than a rag bag Department such as the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs because it concerns a transport issue? If one wants to retain the social integrity of rural areas, in particular, one should be prepared to invest in rural transport services. Does the Minister accept the corollary in respect of providing a decent sum of money for a good local rural transport system?
Pobal allocates the money but the Vote forms part of the Estimate for my Department. A sum of €9 million was allocated last year. Despite a tight rein on current expenditure, I insisted on an additional €2 million being allocated to the rural transport scheme and I intend to treat this issue as a priority. I agree we should try in so far as we can to have a reasonable rural transport system. I do not totally accept that rural Ireland will close down if people are asked not to drive with three or four drinks in them, although I acknowledge this has had an effect.
I agree.
I thank the Minister for his presentation and wish him well on 13 June.