We will discuss the Deloitte report with the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey. I draw attention to the fact that while members of the joint committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I welcome the Minister and his officials, Mr. Jim Humphreys, principal officer, and Mr. Simon Conroy, assistant principal officer. I propose that we hear a short presentation from the Minister, which will be followed by a question and answer session.
Cost and Efficiency Review of Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann: Discussion with Minister for Transport.
I thank the Chairman. I know the committee has had many discussions on this topic. I also know it has seen the report, therefore, I will not deal with it on a page by page basis or try to summarise it. I will outline in general terms where I see the provision of bus services. The time for bus service reform is now and I think the joint committee shares that view. The Deloitte report outlines the customer focused reform that I want to see implemented in Dublin Bus. I want to see a stronger, more efficient bus network that can serve more customers more efficiently, saving everybody time and money. I want the system, routes and timetables, to be easy to understand in order that customers will feel confident that the bus will come at a specific time, at which time they will be able to take it. I want to see improved reliability and reduced bunching of buses. I want to see additional customer friendly direct routes into and out of the city and key places of employment and retail centres and the elimination of unnecessary or duplication of bus services. It is in all of our interests that that is done. I want to grow passenger numbers to make Dublin Bus a better and more customer focused bus company. I want commuters to think about leaving the car at home and taking the bus to work every day. The bus is and should remain the backbone of public transport in Dublin for the foreseeable future.
That is not the bus service provided currently. We need to see major reforms. We are disbursing record amounts of taxpayer money to CIE — €313 million in a year when Exchequer finance has never been more scarce. In spite of that level of investment, CIE is losing passengers, at a dramatic rate in the past six to eight months. This does not make sense at a time when people are crying out for stress free transport services for themselves and their families. The Government has increased the subsidy to CIE by more than 34% since 2002. Capacity on Dublin Bus services has increased by 35% in that period, yet passenger numbers are still falling. This is not sustainable. Therefore, reform is essential, particularly in Dublin Bus. Given the current difficult economic climate, the public must get more from its investment in CIE. Unless cost reduction measures are taken by the company, it will record losses of approximately €100 million during the course of the year. That cannot be allowed to happen. I am not interested in cutting passenger numbers or making life difficult for bus users; I want to do the direct opposite. I know this aim is shared by the committee. People are looking for a fast, efficient and reliable bus service in order that they can leave their cars at home. Through implementation of the principles outlined in the Deloitte recommendations and other bus priority measures which are outside the control of the company, we can deliver a much better service to the public and start to grow passenger numbers again.
This week I have had very positive meetings with the unions in Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus. They approached the Deloitte report and its recommendations in a very positive manner, in spite of the background difficulties to which I referred. They made it clear to me that they were in favour of reforming the bus network to make it more customer-focused and that their job was to drive buses wherever they were told to drive them. They said they would do this. That is a very positive attitude and engagement and an indication of their willingness to change. It coincides with the message I received from CIE management that it will work to make the necessary changes to grow passenger numbers, as set out in the Deloitte report. All of these changes will help to make Dublin Bus better and ensure its future which is very bright. It is time CIE unions and management sat around the table to work out how to provide a top quality bus service for the public and the sooner the better. Nobody wants to see strikes, least of all hard pressed commuters. There is an opportunity to transform the delivery of bus services in the Dublin area and more generally. The Deloitte report provides a good framework for a fundamental review and reshaping of the network in the Dublin area to better meet the needs of the public and at lower cost. I hope to receive an implementation plan shortly from the respective companies and look forward to receiving the support of all for implementation of the report's recommendations.
I have two questions. As outlined, the joint committee decided to produce a two year action plan to develop comprehensive bus services in Dublin. We talked to the unions, management and all other stakeholders. As the Minister stated, there was a great deal of good will, yet there is no sign of a transformation. The most recent announcement of cutbacks in Dublin Bus is very disappointing. There is no urgency on the part of stakeholders, the company, the unions and for that matter the Department in pursuing the transformation process that the Minister is discussing.
The reality is that the vast majority of commuters into Dublin city do not use the bus. Our first recommendation is that buses should be freed to enable them to move effectively. Our second is that extra buses should be provided at peak times when it is quite clear on a number of routes that there are not sufficient buses available. I take the point made in the report that there is no need for extra buses in the current climate. However, if we are to encourage people to use buses at peak times, extra buses must be made available. We have made a series of proposals to encourage courageous decisions to allow buses to run freely. In particular, we have recommended the establishment of a bus gate at College Green. That has not happened and Dublin City Council is procrastinating on the issue. We will not get people onto buses until we get buses moving.
There is no sense of urgency. In the current climate when one would expect more people to use bus services because of the cost of other forms of travel compared with the good value available on buses, there is not that take-up.
I do not accept the Chairman's assertion that there is no sense of urgency. With all due respect to members of the joint committee and their fine report, I made it clear from the word go that I would awaiting the Deloitte report before making decisions on the way forward. Having commissioned the report, it was necessary to do this. That is not to say, however, that I have said to management of Dublin Bus and CIE that they should leave things as they are and make no changes. They have freedom to make them at any stage. It is fair to say the points raised in the report by the committee are endorsed or strengthened by the Deloitte report. I gave management of the company a four week period from the date of publication of the Deloitte report to come back with a management plan. It is due to be presented this week and I expect to receive it. I also expect to see it implemented with a timetable.
On the bus service, capacity has increased by 35% in the period, yet the number of passengers is falling. One does not need to be mathematical genius to know there is enough capacity. What is pointed out in the Deloitte report and that of the joint committee is that buses are not in the right places at the right time. That brings us back to the network. I commissioned a series of maps of the main work centres in Dublin and how people travelled to them, either by bus or car. The maps highlighted that most people travelled to work by car and large areas of the greater Dublin area with no bus services where they are needed. We must get this balance right.
I share the frustration expressed about the proposed bus gate at College Green. I was informed by Dublin City Council that the proposal would be before the strategic policy committee last November and the bus gate in place by February. Before Christmas I discovered the timetable had changed for no apparent reason. The proposal had not gone before the strategic policy committee in November. I was informed it would be July before the gate would be implemented. Dublin City Council believes July is a better time to implement such changes and I accept there is some logic in that. However, it had known that when it informed me last September that the gate would be in place by February. I read the other day in the newspapers that it will not happen until the autumn. I hope Dublin city councillors will support this proposal.
I propose the committee requests Dublin City Council to make the decision immediately to open the bus gate. Is that agreed? Agreed.
The key concern in Dublin Bus is that 290 people will lose their jobs and routes will be cut. We need to radically re-examine the whole process of how buses operate in Dublin city. I do not doubt the Minister's integrity in this matter. Without being political, the committee needs to have a hands-on approach, with the Department, to force change in this area. The local authorities, the unions and Bus Éireann must be called before the committee for an open and frank debate about what must be done now.
The Deloitte report made it clear that significant savings can be made by the unions and Dublin Bus working together for changes in work practices, out-of-service driving and so forth. It will require radical changes. Up to €20 million could be saved with changes to certain routes, including €2 million on the Finglas route. Making such a saving would keep some of the proposed 290 redundancies at bay.
We need to forget demarcation lines and go for a better service for commuters. New routes must be examined with the 120 buses to be mothballed under the present regime put on them. Dublin Bus should also interact with private operators to sort out these new routes. It does not make sense to have people losing jobs, buses mothballed and change not happening.
If proper park-and-ride facilities were provided on the approach routes into Dublin city, thousands of people would not have to use their cars. I know the county managers who attended the committee before Christmas were committed to providing such facilities. They need to fast-track these immediately.
In Nantes, Internet access is provided on public buses. Where does Dublin Bus stand on this? Commuters could have 20 minutes to spare on a bus. The key point is that we must change the perception of Dublin Bus and make it more attractive for commuting.
I understand that at the height of the economic boom, bus passenger numbers were falling. It is not just the downturn in the economy that is causing this problem.
Fine Gael is holding public meetings around Dublin, many of which I have attended. Last night in the Dublin Central constituency, I heard of buses travelling with no passengers on them. This does not make sense.
Without being political, I want radical changes to be made in how Dublin Bus operates.
Passenger numbers should not be falling. At the last meeting with Dublin Bus, I pointed out that in north Dublin, one of the fastest growing population areas in the country, Dublin Bus has failed to provide services, yet there is bunching and duplication of routes. For example, the No. 128 goes along the Malahide Road which is already serviced by Malahide, Darndale, Donaghmede and Coolock buses. Dublin Bus must go into the areas where there is real demand for bus services. There is an estate of 3,000 houses in Swords for which Dublin Bus has not yet provided a service.
One service to be cut is the express service from Swords. If Dublin Bus is looking for passengers, cutting the peak time services from Swords is not the way to go about it. How can Dublin Bus management justify not providing a service there?
I envy southsiders because they have the DART, Luas and a damn good bus service. Last Saturday's edition of The Irish Times had a letter from an irate southsider. He noted five buses going to Dún Laoghaire from Donnybrook recently, two of which were three quarters full and the other three with no passengers. How can Dublin Bus have a service with empty buses? It is ridiculous for Dublin Bus to compete with the Luas and the DART. It should be providing services from residential areas to rail stations. Anyone with any sense will use the train because it generally runs on time. If Dublin Bus wants to expand, it must identify its market.
With regard to bringing in the city council, I fully agree, but we should be demanding the completion of the two bridges. Blocking off College Green may sound great, but people still have to get around and if they are not using buses, they have to use their cars. We must demand the completion forthwith of the Hawkins Street-Marlborough Street bridge and the one further down the quays.
Before I call Deputy Cuffe, there is a traffic management plan and a traffic circulation plan in place, as we heard from the DTO.
It does not include the completion of the two bridges, unfortunately.
One of our proposals was that a bailey bridge be constructed at Marlborough Street. There is a clear plan, which means traffic will not be brought to a stop when this development happens.
During the years I have followed transport proposals in Dublin and often hear the call for more bridges. We have a dozen road bridges in inner city Dublin as far the East Link Bridge. It is more a question of the allocation of space on these bridges. I am mindful of the fact that during the morning peak period the average car contains 1.4 people, while the average bus contains between 20 and 40. We must allocate space in a careful manner. I strongly believe we must give much more space to public transport, regardless of how many new bridges we need to build. We have a dozen bridges; let us use them to their best capacity.
In a recession people travel less. There is less shopping and commuting. That is a challenge to public transport companies, but it is also an opportunity for dramatic reform. People are looking for value for money, which Dublin Bus can offer. However, it must be the kind of service people want. It is difficult, but there is a major opportunity for Dublin Bus if there is reform. One reason people do not take buses is that they are not sure about their reliability. Does the Minister, or anyone, have reliability statistics for Dublin Bus? We have them for mainline and suburban rail services, but I have not been able to get my hands on any for Dublin Bus. I suspect there are no such statistics. When it comes down to what happens to buses when they arrive late into town or out of town, the controller is more preoccupied by ensuring the shift is worked correctly than by reliability for the bus passenger. There are cases in which bus drivers are told to turn around or take their breaks rather than keeping buses on schedule. The question of whether the Minister has reliability statistics for Dublin Bus routes is a direct one. I suspect they are not available.
I am conscious of the need for simpler fares. When we had the chairman of Dublin Bus before the committee some time ago, he said he did not know how many prepaid fare options there were. He later sent me a written answer indicating that there were 40 prepaid fare options. There are another dozen fares one can pay on the bus. It is enormously confusing. The Labour Party had a brilliant proposal a year or two ago for a simple €1 fare. That may have been too simple but there is perhaps a need for a multiple of a 50 cent fare — 50 cent, €1, €1.50, or €2 — in order that the dwell time of buses can be reduced. It takes 20 seconds from the time it stops at a station for the Luas to start again, but it can take a bus several minutes to do so as commuters look for change in their pockets and put it in the slot. There are options available; we need to simplify matters. Does the Minister have a view on the issue?
When did the Minister know things were going wrong at Dublin Bus? I met representatives of the company almost a year ago, in March 2008. They had a standard presentation and we talked at considerable length about the dramatic fall-off in passenger numbers. I wonder whether this was formally communicated to the Minister at the time. It seems he provided the buses and expected a service to be provided, but suddenly Dublin Bus began to haemorrhage passengers. At what stage did he know there was a problem? It seems Dublin Bus suddenly decided that it would cut services rather than reform the service.
In summary, I would like to know about the value for money issue, reliability, simpler fares and when the Minister knew things were going wrong. There is one last point which I have mentioned several times at committees. Real-time passenger information and integrated ticketing were mentioned in reports 15 years ago. Why are we still waiting?
I will start by emphasising, with my colleagues, that a recession should present an opportunity for public transport, not be a time for cutbacks. Many of my questions follow on from those raised at a public meeting held in my constituency last night about these issues.
The Minister has outlined a good reform programme to get things back on track in Dublin Bus. Does he not agree that many of these programmes should have been put in place when times were good, as opposed to now, to try to head off the difficulties we are facing? One of the issues raised last night by employees of Dublin Bus who have been with the company for much longer than those who are to be laid off was whether it would be possible to spread the lay-offs among a more balanced sector of employees, as opposed to those who had just joined the company. I understand why, from a management point of view, there would be good reasons for asking staff who have just joined to leave, but surely over a couple of years, if more senior staff were to leave, the cost savings to the company would actually be greater.
The Minister recently introduced the Dublin Transport Authority legislation which gives him the ability to be a provider of last resort, to step in and provide public transport services in exceptional circumstances. Does he believe he will need to do this in the coming year in response to some of the difficulties we may be facing?
Another issue raised last night was with regard to bus licensing, a subject also mentioned by Deputy O'Dowd. My understanding is that the Minister is looking forward to introducing legislation later in the year to tackle the licensing regime. Does he still plan to do this? Does he plan to give the DTA and his Department the ability to offer licences more generously than has been the case up to now?
I will be brief, as I do not want to go over the same ground.
Deputy O'Dowd spoke about park and ride facilities. This committee has spent a fair amount of time on the issue. I cannot see any logical reason such schemes would not form a major part of transport infrastructure. One does not have to be a scientist to know that if cars are taken off artery roads into a city such as Dublin and prevented from reaching the city centre, it must be good and make for better management. I have noticed in the last year or two that some people, even in the Minister's Department, are beginning to say that if it is made less attractive for private car users to get into the city without park and ride facilities, private cars will somehow vanish into thin air, that they will vamoose. Either they will not come or they will go elsewhere. Car ownership is still on the increase, despite the economic position, and there is no reason to believe that in the next ten years it will not dramatically increase again. Surely there is a central role for park and ride facilities. I would like to hear the Minister's personal view. If he believes in it, what is he doing to ensure it becomes a reality? It is not easy to put in place, as we must accept. However, it makes great sense to take cars off the road as they approach the city from whatever angle.
We have been talking about Dublin Bus losing customers. As far as competition between Dublin Bus and Luas is concerned, does it mean Luas has beaten the socks off bus services? It appears that passengers have transferred to the Luas where they can. Does the Minister have any data to indicate whether that is the case? Most passengers who come off a train at Heuston Station seem to head towards the Luas. There is a very good bus service but a delegate from Bus Éireann told the committee a few weeks ago that the company was going to reduce the number of buses serving the station. Are buses unattractive for other reasons or is Luas winning the war against them?
I am sure the Minister will be disappointed to hear that the beloved No. 92 bus service is being curtailed, which does not make sense.
That is a pity.
I will ask a question on the cost and efficiency review by Deloitte. The Government continually receives reports on a variety of subjects and accepts some recommendations but not others. Does it accept every aspect of the Deloitte report? The report states Bus Éireann, given its network, is as efficient as it can be. How does the Minister explain the fact that, because of his attitude to the public service obligation, 300 jobs and 150 buses are to be removed from the network? If the service is as efficient as the report states, why are we losing 30 buses in Cork, 15 in Galway, 15 in Waterford, 12 in Dundalk and 25 in Dublin? The Bus Éireann network is being eviscerated. If the report is correct, it is the Minister who is responsible because of his refusal to support the public service obligations of Bus Éireann.
On page 9 of the report it is made clear that the public service obligation subsidy of 12% of revenue for Bus Éireann is by far the lowest of any bus service across Europe. The PostAuto service in Switzerland receives a 51% subsidy. The Walloon TEC service receives a 78% subsidy but Bus Éireann receives only a 12% subsidy. The Minister is attempting to use the Deloitte report to stand over the decimation of the Bus Éireann network, for which there is no economic justification.
The Minister accepts that Dublin Bus receives the second lowest public service obligation subsidy in the European Union. The Citybus service in Brussels receives a 68% subsidy; the service in Amsterdam, 62% and in Lyon, 79%, while ours receives 29%. I only heard part of the Minister's presentation but is this not a fundamental issue for areas such as Swords? Deputy Kennedy advocated new routes for Swords but at the last meeting seemed to call for the removal of the service from the north fringe of the town.
I said there was duplication.
The whole point about integrated planning is that a district of 40,000 houses such as on the north fringe should be catered for by an integrated transport service. Is that not the Minister's policy and is it not an element of the smarter travel policy which the Minister seems to be trying to unravel?
We will meet the author of the report next week but I am disappointed the Minister did not come before the committee at the same time as the bus companies and workers to stand over what he is saying today. Perhaps he will address the workers in the next couple of weeks when, because of his incompetence, they will withdraw their labour, meaning commuters would have no service.
On the Finglas corridor €2 million will be saved and there will be no public service obligation if this is replicated. I was talking to a couple of people from Finglas during the week and they praised the service on the No. 140 route. While there may have been duplication in respect of the No. 140A, 140B, 140C and 140D bus routes, a good service was being provided. If what is happening in Finglas is replicated across the 14 corridors, senior citizens, women with children and vulnerable commuters will have to walk further for a bus. There is merit in the plan to have a simpler route network but has the Minister told Dublin Bus how far citizens in the greater Dublin area will be from a bus service in the event of a reorganisation of routes? The UK Transport Secretary has laid down parameters for bus companies in rural and urban areas in England in terms of how close passengers have to be to a service. If the report is implemented, there will be no public service obligation and a lot more people will be further away from a bus service.
Members of the Oireachtas insisted on some routes being developed or maintained in Cork and Galway, as well as Dublin. Can what is happening in the Finglas corridor be replicated without delivering an inferior service to the majority of Dubliners? People in many areas say the service in their area is good. Good services are provided on the Nos. 128 and 27 bus routes in north Coolock, for which people are grateful. A central feature of the report is flawed.
Deputy Cuffe and I agreed on many matters when we were members of the rainbow alliance on Dublin City Council. The great journalist, Vincent Browne, has an interesting article in today's edition of The Irish Times which Deputy Cuffe should read. It states the country has a political problem, not an economic one, and that we can change the Government. We have an economic problem but primarily it is a political problem.
The Deputy should stick to the topic.
I agree.
Deputy Broughan should, please, stick to the topic.
We could have a different Minister for Transport and a different Government if Deputy Cuffe followed some of the policies he and I used to support. In 1991 the Green Party and the Labour Party called for the provision of real-time information, integrated ticketing and intermediate timings in order that passengers and bus drivers would know if buses were on schedule. We asked for this 18 years ago and are still waiting. This issue is within the remit of the Minister for Transport.
Why did the Minister not introduce the bus licensing Bill? I am sick of hearing him talk about it but he has had two years to introduce it and his predecessor, ten. The Minister also did nothing about the fuel rebate issue. All private and public transport carriers have been badly damaged by losing the 32 cent or 33 cent rebate. That is the Minister's responsibility. President Sarkozy and the French Minister for Transport can do what they want about fuel rebates but the Minister and the Taoiseach have done nothing about the issue.
There are many areas in which the Minister could have taken action such as automatic vehicle location, AVL. However, he has not done so. Why do we not have AVL and why is the DTA not up and running?
Everybody has agreed to limit his or her contribution because a number of members are anxious to get to the House for the Order of Business. I ask the Deputy to be brief.
The Deputy might ask Deputy Joan Burton why she blocked a QBC through Blanchardstown.
It was our policy to provide QBCs long before Deputy Kennedy was on the fence.
I specifically remember that Deputy Burton when she was a councillor, and her replacement on Fingal County Council, were vociferously against the QBC route in Blanchardstown.
Allow Deputy Broughan to continue without interruption.
The Deputy's party opposed the cycle network. The Deputy has spoken against everything in public transport. The current situation is that people will be left without buses. Did the Department talk to Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann, nine months to a year ago when this depression was pending, regarding employment and development of routes? Was it Government policy to expand bus public transport as it was the Labour Party's policy before the 2007 election? In other words, did the Government create the situation with which the management in Dublin Bus are now dealing? Does the Minister think the management of Dublin Bus is up to the task? If it is not, what steps will the Minister take to ensure it will be?
To ask the kinds of questions being asked by those young drivers, some of whom gave up good jobs to join Dublin Bus or Bus Éireann in the past year, why is there not a proposal for voluntary redundancy across the companies? Why are many of the Euro routes, the Nitelink routes, a whole range of critical routes across the Dublin Bus network being eviscerated? What is the Minister doing in terms of talking to Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann management to ensure that the impact on young drivers and on the network will not be as it appears it will be following the development of major industrial strife and industrial action?
The key point the Deloitte report demonstrates is that the Government and its predecessors have failed to develop accessible and cheap bus public transport in both rural and urban Ireland.
I thank the Minister for attending. I wish to make some brief comments given that most of the other members have already made the points I intended to make.
Passenger numbers on Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus increased when the QBCs were introduced because the service was reliable. However, many of those passengers were lost during the upgrade of the M50, M4 and the Newcastle-Lucan junction. Now that the bus corridor has been reopened we need to again market bus transport. At our last meeting I suggested that a discount be offered to commuters on specific days. I am aware that Dublin Bus has distributed free tickets by having them put through people's letterboxes, but something more is needed, for example, a media campaign advertising cheaper travel costs with Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus on particular days. People were using the service because it was reliable but many switched to Irish Rail during the upgrades and may not be aware that the bus corridor has reopened.
We need to focus much more on local authorities with regard to infrastructure and getting a service to the people. There are many such issues in Kildare North where estates are not being served. The focus of the local authority's director of transport services has always been on roads and we need to focus more on public transport. I have received quite a few communications from people in Kilcock regarding the Galway bus which travels into Maynooth, turns around at a bus terminus and goes back out on to the motorway, bypassing Kilcock and stopping again at Enfield. The bus service from Kilcock is appalling with two services in the morning and two in the evening. It has been suggested that at least some of the Galway buses could come through Kilcock via the old Maynooth-Kilcock road rather than going back out on to the motorway and bypassing Kilcock. There are many such practical suggestions from people. We are not looking for extra buses. We are looking for better use of the buses we have.
I thank the committee members for their largely positive comments in favour of the implementation of the principles outlined in the Deloitte report. I will deal with some of the points raised by individual members.
Deputy O'Dowd made a very constructive contribution regarding the need for better services, better routes, and significant changes that can bring savings. I accept what he says regarding changes. He stated that we need to force changes through. I would prefer to talk in terms of, and clearly this is what Deputy O'Dowd means——
Pushing the changes through.
——pushing and driving the changes forward. I have no difficulty with that. In regard to the private sector, I made it clear previously that anybody can apply for a licence on routes anywhere around Dublin. There are vast areas of Dublin — Deputy Kennedy mentioned places in his area — where people can apply for a bus licence. There is no bar on doing so. I do not, however, want to set up a kind of false competition. I want good services. Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus can interact with the private sector, a point that Deputy O'Dowd has made on several occasions. That is something I would encourage. Bus Éireann is probably better at this than Dublin Bus.
Bus Éireann does a very good job. Dublin bus does not do it at all.
Dublin Bus does not do it at all, except for school transport. A number of Deputies and Senators raised the issue of park and ride facilities. It breaks my heart that for the past four or five years money has been provided by my Department under Transport 21 for park and ride facilities and that to say progress on it is poor does not adequately describe the situation. It is abysmal.
How much money is available?
In the past four or five years €50 million has been available for traffic management issues across the Department's vote.
Has it not been taken up by local authorities?
It has not been taken up. Last year was the first year that the full amount of money for those traffic management issues was taken into account. I acknowledge that this committee did a very useful job by inviting the managers from adjacent local authorities here. It is fair to say there has been a noticeable step-up in inquiries about that. That is something that needs to be done. Members are right when they say we cannot expect people from areas where there is no bus service to park their cars on the side of the road at a location where there is a bus service in order to use public transport into the city. They will not do that because it is not safe and secure. Park and ride facilities must be provided.
I do not see the various modes of public transport as being in competition. They should dovetail their efforts. It was suggested that there was a fall-off in the number of bus passengers following the provision of the Luas service. There was a fall-off one year but that had more to do with Luas works rather than the provision of the service which has not affected the number of bus passengers. It is not the intention that bus services should try to compete on parallel lines with, Luas, DART and train services but should feed into those services and make use of them. That is what is meant in the Deloitte report where it refers to adopting a more sensible approach. That is what smarter travel is about.
There is no doubt that buses will be taken off routes, given the financial situation in which Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann currently find themselves. There is no point in running buses if there are no passengers. It would be nonsense to run 25 buses on a route if they are half full or three quarters empty most of the time.
Does the Minister think there should be off-peak bus services?
The Deputy had a rant for ten minutes and I did not interrupt him.
This is the Minister's rant and I heard his earlier one.
I will tell the Deputy exactly what I mean.
The Minister will leave this Department as he left all the others.
One tailors services to the needs and demands of the public. It is customers we should look after and nobody else as they are the people who pay.
They are being left on the street.
The Deputy asked me what I was doing for Marlborough Street. We provided €3.5 million for the Marlborough Street bridge, which is out to tender. The Macken Street bridge is being constructed off site. I have spoken to Dublin City Council and all of the stakeholders to discuss pinch points in bus corridors and have asked Dublin Bus to explain why it has taken so long to put AVLs on buses. It is the job of Dublin Bus, rather than mine, but I am driving the company to install them. I hold quarterly meetings with the integrated ticketing board to ensure it keeps to the target, set in 2005, for integrated ticketing to be introduced by the end of this year. I have held discussions with the QBC office and more QBCs are being put in place. I have mentioned the measures taken with regard to park and ride facilities. We have published the smarter travel plan and put in place the DTA to co-ordinate many of the actions. Recruitment of a CEO is taking place and I hope to have the authority up and running soon. Contracts are now being negotiated for the public service obligations of the various CIE companies, which will deliver real changes for people using their services.
Can the Minister tell us more about those contracts?
Up to now there has been a memorandum of understanding between the Department and the CIE group of companies as to the levels of service they must provide. From next December contracts that specify the frequency and level of services on each PSO route must be in place. If the contracts are not signed by 9 December I will have to put all PSO routes out to tender for the private and public sector. There is a window of approximately six months to agree them and work is ongoing to that end.
Deputy Cuffe asked about reliability statistics. I have never seen a reliable set of reliability statistics. One of the problems the Department has is the lack of reliable statistics and it is very difficult to get them from a company when they are needed.
It is outrageous that some public transport companies provide them but Dublin Bus does not.
That is the way it is. It is important there is a focused DTA which can base its decisions on reliable statistics. I agree with the Deputy on the need to prioritise road space and that is what smarter travel is all about. We must all, including me, get away from the notion that roads are just for cars and that anything else is just a nuisance. Bicycles, pedestrians and public transport need to be the focus and the smarter travel plan accepts that.
There was a question about the dwell times of buses, which are a huge problem. The more people a company can get to prepay for tickets the more efficient its service becomes. Bus companies are aware of that and are working to make prepaying a more attractive option. I cannot give a precise date for the fall-off in passenger numbers but it became evident in the middle of last year and the final figure in respect of Dublin Bus is estimated to be 2%. The fall-off prompted us to accelerate the Deloitte report.
Senator Donohoe asked a number of questions, some of which I have answered. He suggested we should have changed things during the good times but it is more difficult to do so in good times because people think throwing money at the issue, by providing more buses and drivers and so on, is the solution. In those circumstances, it is difficult to ascertain whether the money is being spent efficiently. When I came into the Department I was not happy with the level of service. I was pleasantly surprised by the Deloitte report as there were many positive aspects for both companies. Its suggestions are sensible, particularly those to stop duplication, to make it easier for people to know about the network and to know when and from where buses leave.
I was asked about the people who are to leave Dublin Bus but that is an IR issue that has to be addressed by the company with the unions.
Is the Minister prepared to do anything to prevent these strikes?
Yes. As I said yesterday, I urge both sides to sit around the table as strikes do not solve anything.
The DTA will be a provider of last resort and will be empowered to step in where a company is not providing a service. If buses are not being provided, I envisage the DTA will procure a service from the private sector or another public transport company rather than set up a company itself to do so.
Would the Minister avail of the direct award subcontractor system we recommended in our report? That would involve bringing in private operators into the Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus networks.
As long as there is a public transport system which serves the needs of the people I do not mind whether it is provided directly by the company or not. It is important we have a strong public transport company but I have no problem if a service is provided by contract or subcontract and Bus Éireann already does that effectively.
Deputy Connaughton made several points with which I have dealt. I do not understand why park and ride has taken so long. We should not look at competition between bus and Luas as well, as they should complement each other. Our focus has always been on roads, rather than on public transport, and that does not do justice to what is needed in the greater Dublin area and other cities. Our focus should be on growing numbers in public transport and buses are the way to do that.
Can the Minister address the questions I asked him about the report we are supposed to be discussing and issues relating to the PSO, the Finglas corridor and the fleet?
I was trying to answer all the questions the Deputy asked which were not relevant to the report.
The Minister is noticeably sliding around the report itself.
I am not sliding around the report.
The Minister to continue without interruption.
I accept the Deloitte report.
Does the Minister accept the points made about the PSO?
I accept that a range of changes need to be made. The Deputy's points regarding subvention in other countries conveniently do not take into account that in most of those countries we are talking about current subvention. The taxpayers here paid for the buses.
The Minister should give us the figures. Some of those are compiled on the same basis as our figures.
We can have a philosophical argument——
It is not philosophical.
We can have a philosophical argument about this.
It makes rubbish of what the Minister is saying.
We got €313 million from the taxpayers here to run a bus service. Does the Deputy believe that in the current circumstances we can get more from the taxpayers? That is what the Deputy is asking me to do.
The Minister and his colleagues in Cabinet created the current circumstances.
This is typical Labour Party nonsense.
No, that is what happened.
It is populist nonsense.
It is not nonsense. The Minister stood by——
Yesterday the Deputy said we should throw €95 million to one side——
The Minister stood by while that was going on.
——because Michael O'Leary said it. Let us have a few constructive suggestions from the Labour Party——
The Minister will go to the Finance committee shortly.
——not the populist nonsense we have been listening to in the past three or four months. The unions and management in the company agree with the Deloitte report. The question was asked how far people should be away from the bus. They should be as close to the bus as possible.
How close is that?
One cannot run a bus by everybody's door.
Is it half a kilometre?
Much closer than it is to some of my constituents who must travel four or five miles to get to a place where there is bus transport, where there are no taxi services or anything else.
That is the Minister's fault.
I thank the Minister and his officials for their attendance and congratulate them on the smarter travel report which is a very innovative report. We look forward to seeing it implemented as quickly as possible.