I move amendment No. 4:—
Before sub-section (2) to insert a new sub-section as follows:—
( ) Within three months of the passing of this Act and yearly thereafter, the board shall, in respect of each branch line on which a service of trains for passengers and merchandise or a service for passengers only or merchandise only is maintained, publish, in such newspapers circulating in the area served by each such branch line as the board shall think proper, the following particulars:—
(a) the volume of traffic and receipts in respect thereof carried by the train service on each branch line during the period of the previous 12 months;
(b) the expenditure incurred by the board during the period specified in the immediately preceding paragraph in respect of each such branch line, and
(c) in case such expenditure exceeds receipts, an estimate of the increase in traffic that would be necessary so that the expenditure and receipts would be equal in the next 12 months.
On the previous amendment, we had a considerable amount of discussion on the subject of the closing of branch lines. The Minister, in his reply on the Second Stage in this House, said at column 762, Volume 49:—
"The problem of railway operation can be viewed from one of two angles. It will disappear if we can get more traffic on to the railways. Alternatively, it can be removed by cutting the costs of providing railway services."
The purpose of this amendment is to deal with the problem in the first way, that is, to get more traffic on to the railways. The Minister in the course of his speech on the previous amendment said that no branch line would be closed down, if local interest could hold out any prospect that it would become economic in time. I am inclined to think that there are very few people living in any of the areas at present served by branch lines who know what the position of those branch lines is from the point of view of C.I.E.— whether they are paying propositions or not. The purpose of this amendment is to make it obligatory on C.I.E., within three months of the passing of this Bill, to give some information to the users and people resident in the areas served by the different branch lines as to the state of the finances of those branch lines. It does not seem to me that there will be any difficulty on the part of C.I.E. in providing that information, because presumably at present and within three months of the passing of this Bill, they will know what the economic possibilities of each branch line are. I assume that they keep the working of each branch line under close examination.
The Minister did say on the previous amendment that branch lines were useful for the traffic they provided for the main line. That was, he indicated, an aspect of the economic value of a branch line to the railway as a whole. It strikes me that perhaps this amendment does not go quite far enough. There might be some indication by C.I.E. as to that aspect of their problem. I do not think it is right to say that people would not use the railways, and that they are using trucks and lorries and private transport because they do not want to use the railways. I am quite satisfied from my own experience that there are many people who would not travel by their own private cars, if C.I.E. were providing a somewhat better service on certain lines. Perhaps a great deal of the increase in the volume of heavy haulage traffic on the road is attributable to the fact that C.I.E. did not cater for the needs of the people. It takes the view: "We are providing the services; let the people come and use them." That is not the view that C.I.E. should take. It should try to provide for the needs of the people and accommodate them as far as possible.
The Minister, in the same column of Volume 49, said in his reply:—
"Indeed, quite a comparatively small increase in the total volume of business available to C.I.E. would wipe out their deficit if that increase did not bring with it any increase in the operating charges."
If that be the case, people in areas which may have their branch lines cut off might be able to supply that small increase that will make C.I.E. a paying proposition.
I do not think that merely publishing the statistics suggested in the amendment will have a magical effect on the people, but it will provide business interests and people in public life with some idea of the problems in relation to those different branch lines. It might stimulate people into getting more and more traffic put on the branch lines, particularly when they know, as they will from these accounts, that there is a likelihood that otherwise they will be left without any branch lines, and that the decision will rest entirely, as now happens after the defeat of the previous amendment, with the Board of C.I.E.
This amendment is for the purpose of creating that body of opinion which will make it something akin to a patriotic duty in the minds of people to use the railway services. Perhaps many people would make their choice, where it is only a matter of slight difference, to have their goods consigned to them by railway, if they thought that they would not have themselves deprived of the branch lines into their own town or village. The purpose of the amendment is clear enough, and the information which it is sought should be published by C.I.E. should not be difficult to assemble and advertise.