Cuireann an pobal suim mhór i gnóthaí Córais Iompair Éireann. Tá sé sin mar a bheadh súil leis mar tá a lán daoine timpeall na tíre ag brath ar an mBord i slite ilghnéitheacha. Ina measc tá na daoine a úsáideann seirbhísí traen agus bus CIÉ de gnáth. I bhfochair siúd tá na turasóirí a úsaideann seirbhísí poiblí taistil. Tá muintir tionscail agus tráchtálá freisin ag brath ar CIÉ chun a mbunábhair agus a dtairgí a iompar ó cheann ceann na tíre. Tá níos mó ná trí míle déag go leith de fhostái i CIÉ agus tá mór suim acu san gCóras agus a thodchaí ins na blianta atá le teacht.
Ní féidir dhéarmad a dhéanamh ar suim na mílte a íocann cáin ioncaim is ar uile, mar tugann an Rialtas os cionn céad milliún punt do CIÉ gach bliain, ionas go mbeidh an Bord in ann seirbhísí a tharraingíonn deontais do coimeád ar siúl.
De gnáth bíonn suim mhór ag Seanadóirí i gnóthaí CIÉ mar tá sé soiléár dúinn uile go bhfuil tábhacht faoi leith ins an gCóras taistil náisiúnta. Tá ceisteanna tábhachtacha le plé ins an mBille atá os ar gcomhair maidir le airleacain don Bhord ón Aire Airgeadais, cumhachtaí an Bhoird chun airgead a fháil ar iasacht, ráthaíocht Stáit le hiasachta CIÉ, díol talún i gcás ordú tréigin a bheith déanta maidir le líne iarnróid agus pionósanna i gcásanna áirithe, mar shampla duine a bhriseann fho-dlíthe an Bhoird, foghla ar an iarnróid, gheataí a fhágáil gan dúnadh ag crosaíri comhréidh áirithe agus duine nach íocann táillí taistil. Beidh mé ag éisteacht le gach rud a bheas le rá anseo i dtaobh an Bhille agus táim cinnte go mbainfidh CIÉ agus mé féin leas as i bhfábhair seirbhísí taistil in Éirinn.
This Bill gives the House the opportunity to focus on some of the affairs of CIE. The organisation is important for many reasons. Its extensive transport network by rail and road makes it the backbone of the country's inland transport system. Very many are dependent on the services of Bus Atha Cliath, Bus Éireann and Iarnród Éireann for their personal transport needs. Industry and commerce use the freight services extensively. In summary, CIE services make a substantial input into the social and economic life of the community.
In passing, I began my working life with Córas Iompair Éireann and, on account of that and consequent on that, I have more than the usual interest in the affairs of Córas Iompair Éireann. As taxpayers and legislators, we are interested in CIE because the Exchequer subvention to CIE, now well in excess of £100 million per annum, has to be met from the State's resources.
The economy is passing through a difficult phase and this increases the emphasis on value for money, cost effectiveness and efficiency. This is highlighted for the CIE organisation in the challenging targets which have been set for them by the Government for the period 1985-89. Iarnród Éireann are striving to achieve the railway target of reducing costs by close to 20 per cent over the five years. Bus Átha Cliath are seeking to halve their 1984 deficit in real terms and Bus Éireann's aim is to make provincial buses profitable. The achievement of these targets has not been made easy for CIE by the State's inability over recent years to meet in full its financial commitment to the board. This, in part, has generated the need for the Bill now before the House.
The purposes of the Bill are: to discharge the obligation on CIE to repay to the Exchequer capital advances of £44,458,691; to enable the board to borrow up to £45 million on a long term basis for meeting its obligations and carrying out its duties; to allow the board the option of selling by tender property linked to abandoned railway lines; to increase the levels of penalties for various offences in relation to the railways, and to provide for arrest without warrant by the Garda in respect of certain offences.
Although an explanatory memorandum was circulated with the Bill, I wish to explain the background and other relevant particulars to the House as well as the fact that the Bill before the House takes account of a number of amendments to it passed by Dáil Éireann.
The particular arrangements which eventually led to the proposed change to the State advances date back to late 1985. At that time, the then Ministers for Communications and Finance settled, for 1986 and subsequent years, the timing of payment of the normal Exchequer subvention and interest charges on the capital cost of DART to CIE. This involved the following: the deferral to 1987 of some payments due in 1986; the deferral to 1988 of substantial arrears due to be paid in 1987, and the payment in permanent arrears of some moneys due in 1988 and subsequent years.
Pending receipt of the arrears, CIE had to have recourse to temporary borrowings in order to meet their liabilities from 1985 onwards. The accumulated effect of the shortfalls in subvention and DART interest is that the Exchequer would need to provide an additional £45 million in 1988 in order to discharge the arrears. Added to the subvention of £113.6 million which has been allocated to CIE for 1988, this would have brought the total Exchequer requirement for CIE next year to close to £160 million. The allocation of £113.6 million includes £14 million to cover the total expected interest payment on DART in 1988. The total allocation for 1987 is £107.4 million.
When the Government came to dealing with the Estimates for 1988 it was obvious that there was no prospect in current economic circumstances of meeting CIE's needs in full. At the same time, we recognised that, if the issue were not tackled, the Exchequer's indebtedness to CIE would continue to grow, with adverse consequences for the Exchequer and the CIE financial position. Having examined the limited options available, the Government decided to write off against the shortfalls in subvention the £44,458,691 which had been provided for CIE between 1965 and 1982 in repayable advances. The write off of the advances is provided for in section 2 (1) of the Bill.
As CIE are required to pay interest on the repayable advances, section 2 (2) of the Bill discharges CIE from that liability. The interest currently amounts to about £4.4 million per annum. This saving to CIE will serve as an offset against interest payable by the board on the borrowings generated by the deferral of the subvention moneys. The board will, however, be required to finance the repayment of the borrowings from its own resources. The net effect of this arrangement for CIE is that the additional costs for the board will be confined to the repayment of the sums borrowed to finance arrears of subvention instead of providing at some date in the future for repayment of State advances.
The Minister would have liked to have met the Exchequer liability in full but this was not possible in current circumstances. The solution, while not perfect, is, nevertheless, better than any likely to emerge as a result of pushing the problem aside for another day. It brings to an end the payment of subvention in arrears and makes CIE's position clear so that they can plan their finances for the future.
To help CIE meet the additional burden, section 3 has been included to enable the board to borrow on a long term basis for the purpose of financing the arrears of subvention. This will involve the conversion to term loans of temporary borrowings already incurred in relation to the arrears. In that way, the repayments of principal can be spread over a longer period. Section 4 of the Bill provides for the guaranteeing in the normal way of those borrowings by the Minister for Finance.
Section 3 of the Bill supplements the board's existing borrowing powers, under which CIE are authorised to borrow for capital purposes on a long term basis and to borrow temporarily for general operational purposes. The statutory limit on borrowings for capital purposes is £250 million and that for temporary borrowing is £40 million. At the end of 1986 the board's borrowings for capital purposes amounted to £157 million and the temporary borrowings stood at £30.7 million. The board's temporary borrowings are now close to the £40 million limit.
Subsection 7 of section 21 of the Transport Act, 1950 empowers the board of CIE to sell land under and adjoining an abandoned railway line, either by private treaty to the owner of the land on both sides of such line, or by public auction to any person including such owner. CIE have requested that the additional option of sale by tender be provided for, because experience has shown that parts of abandoned railway lines which are not of interest to adjoining landowners are sometimes not sufficiently valuable to justify the costs of sale by auction. Section 5 of the Bill provides for sale by tender and CIE plan to use the tendering process, where it would be to the board's advantage to dispose of property in that way. These tenders would be invited by public advertisement.
Members of the House have been concerned with reports of offences and vandalism committed on or in relation to the railway. The offences cover a wide range of problems such as wilful destruction of property, stone throwing at trains, placing obstacles in the path of trains, refusing to close gates at certain level crossings, trespass on the railway, and improper use of the communication cord on trains. All these involve dangerous practices and can lead to loss of life or limb and damage to property. What starts out as a "lark" can cause irremediable loss and damage.
Unfortunately, the frequency and scope of many of these types of incidents have grown in recent years. We are now long past the stage where they can be treated as outbreaks of high spirits. Many of them are obviously undertaken with malicious damage in mind. At considerable cost, the board have been taking special measures to try to curb these objectionable and anti-social activities. Some success has been achieved but it is clear that further measures are needed to impress on those concerned that their misbehaviour is unacceptable. CIE have also to deal with people who refuse to pay or try to avoid paying fares.
While the existing legislation provides for prosecutions and penalties, the courts are handicapped in applying penalties which match the gravity of the offences. This is because of the impact of maximum permissible penalties has been eroded over time. For example, it would pay a person to avoid paying his or her fare in the knowledge that the maximum fine on conviction is £2. The penalties for some of the offences dealt with in the Bill were set as long ago as 1861. Some of the penalties were revised between that time and 1971, but even they no longer match the potential grievousness of offences. Penalties have to be imposed which will convince offenders of the likely serious adverse personal consequences of their acts.
Existing maximum penalties range from £2 to £25. For the types of offences which are covered by sections 6 to 10 of the Bill, the Minister originally proposed to increase the maximum penalties to £300 and/or a maximum of three months imprisonment. During the debate on the Bill in Dáil Éireann a number of Deputies expressed the view that the proposed penalties were not sufficiently severe and that they should be increased further. The Minister considered this matter further in the light of the debate and views expressed by his colleagues in Government. The conclusion reached was that there was a justifiable basis for even higher maximum penalties than those included in the Bill as introduced. As a result, Dáil Éireann agreed amendments to increase the maximum penalties and the new levels are set down in sections 6 to 10 of the Bill.