Absolutely not, but some people use it as a denigratory term when they are speaking to women. "School ma'am" can be a sexist term. There is, however, no point in reading the review like one would read the potted précis or critique of a poem without reading the poem itself. People should read the main rail safety report itself. Luckily it is written in a jargon-free, lucid, highly interesting and objective manner.
When I drove to Knockcroghery that Sunday evening, I said to my husband, Enda, that I could not let this continue. I decided then to request an international study on rail safety. I could not genuinely live with the premise that I did not know the exact extent of safety needs on the railways.
Many of us come from railway towns. I was born and brought up within 50 yards of the railway station in Athlone. As children we grew up with the family of the late lamented station master, Mr. Lally. The shunting noises of that major railway station are the sounds that linger in my memory.
The crash occurred on that Sunday and I brought a report seeking this study to Cabinet on Tuesday. Deputy Yates of the Fine Gael Party asked if it would be a detached, international study, not a CIE study. I was glad that my thoughts and his coincided. From time to time CIE undertakes its own studies but I wanted this study to be done in a certain way and it was.
This report was undertaken by a consultancy team led by International Risk Management Services. The commissioning of this independent study was supported by the Opposition and welcomed in a Dáil resolution in December last year. Therefore, the report has the imprimatur of the Dáil, the Government and the Cabinet. Following the derailment at Knockcroghery, I made a statement in this House commissioning the report and laying out its terms.
I have sent copies of the consultants' report to Members of this House and of Dáil Éireann and it has also been published. I will also be making it available to every worker in Iarnród Éireann. This is not a report for top or middle management; it is for everybody who works on the railways. I want its ownership to comprise those who work on the railways and through them the people who travel by rail.
The report is clear and unambiguous in its analysis and I urge Senators to consider it very carefully. The report is very detailed and it would be impossible to cover every aspect of it here today. I will, therefore, concentrate on providing Members with an outline of the main findings of the report and the Government's response to them.
There are probably few issues on which we will find greater unanimity in this House than that the avoidance of death or injury should be the paramount guiding principle of all railway operations. I am satisfied that Iarnród Éireann is committed to this principle. It is important to acknowledge at the outset that Iarnród Éireann's safety performance over the years compares well to other national railway systems. That is not just my view, you will find that statement made by the consultants in the first sentence of their conclusions. The good safety record of the Irish railway is due in large measure to the skill and experience of railway staff over the years; a point also acknowledged by the consultants.
Nevertheless, it is clear from the report the consultants have concluded that there is a need for significant improvement in the safety of the railway. The task, therefore, of the Government and of the boards, management and staff of CIE and Iarnród Éireann is to use the analysis, findings and recommendations of the report as a springboard to create the conditions for a major improvement in rail safety.
Railway transport has an enviable safety record worldwide and in Ireland, especially when compared to the competing mode of road transport. The last major railway accident in Ireland was in 1983 at Cherryville when seven people died. Yet, sadly, similar numbers are killed on our roads every week and sometimes over a single weekend. However, we cannot allow ourselves to become complacent. We must never lose sight of the fact that, although the nature of rail travel makes it inherently safer than road travel, rail safety ultimately depends on safety conscious railway personnel working with safe infrastructure and rolling stock and relying on rigorous safety management systems and procedures. Even then we cannot take rail safety for granted. No matter how good the infrastructure or how vigilant the staff of the railway, it is a sad fact that even on the best railways accidents will occur.
Ultimately, absolute rail safety can never be guaranteed. In this regard I am mindful of the recent high speed train crash at Eschede in Germany, which occurred on a state-of-the-art railway system and resulted in over 100 people losing their lives.
The consultants' brief required them to consider the adequacy of Iarnród Éireann's existing safety policy, systems, rules and procedures and the adequacy of the company's arrangements for implementing these rules and procedures on the ground. They also considered the adequacy, from a safety viewpoint, of the existing railway infrastructure and facilities including track, signalling systems, rolling stock, bridges, embankments, telecommunications systems, level crossings, etc. They carried out their work in a very rigorous way and looked at best railway practice worldwide. They inspected over 60 per cent of the network. Their examination was very thorough and they looked in detail at samples of all the infrastructure including track, signalling, structures, level crossings and rolling stock.
They interviewed many Iarnród Éireann staff and, of course, talked informally to many others as they travelled in locomotive cabs with drivers or visited signal cabins. They sent a questionnaire to all Iarnród Éireann staff. One in eight replied across all departments and grades in the company. The consultants were full of praise for the unstinting co-operation which they received from the company and all its staff. Very interestingly, just as a cigire inspects a school, they did not make prior announcements of their visits. I think this was the right way to do things.
The consultants concluded that the condition of much of the track, signalling and other infrastructure was poor while the condition of the rolling stock was, on the whole, satisfactory. They also acknowledged that a shortfall in investment in recent years was impacting on safety. They found that recently laid continuous welded rail track was in excellent condition although in need of a safety management system to ensure its continuing safety over time. They concluded that large sections of the older jointed track was in poor condition, particularly on the secondary lines. They found eight serious safety failures on the signalling system when they would have expected to find none. This finding was particularly disappointing and very shocking. Much of the mechanical signalling was in an unacceptable condition and much of the telecommunications equipment was in poor repair. They also identified some problems with level crossings, such as inadequate braking distances from the signals protecting the crossing to the crossing itself and poor signposting and road surfaces. They noted the lack of formal systems for preventive maintenance and inspection of structures. Fencing was poorly maintained in many areas. The condition of the rolling stock was largely satisfactory with no major safety concerns noted.
Contrary to the impression created by some media reports, the DART was found to be in reasonably good condition but concern was expressed about some aspects, such as the need for greater attention to the electric power supply system as it gets older.
While safety related investment in the railway infrastructure is necessary it will not be enough in itself. The consultants found that Iarnród Éireann needs to urgently tackle the management aspects of safety as well. Indeed, IRMS went so far as to say that the benefits of infrastructural investment would be transitory if not accompanied by a programme to improve safety management systems.
If we are to take one lesson from this report it is that we must distinguish hard and soft safety issues. The hard issues relate to the condition of the infrastructure including the permanent way, level crossings, rolling stock and so on. The soft issues relate to management, safety training, continuous monitoring of safety measures and the daily implementation of good safety practice. The report makes the point very cogently that an investment of many millions of pounds in railway infrastructure will be useless if what I refer to as soft safety issues are not tackled. Both aspects of safety must be dealt with.
The most serious safety management deficiency that the consultants found was a lack of a systematic approach to identifying safety hazards and prioritising and implementing remedial action where this is necessary. They stressed the importance of improving the company's approach to safety management on the railway and of instilling a safety culture throughout the organisation from general operative to top management. They emphasised the value of better training and improved documentation and procedures. They acknowledged that an encouraging start had been made at senior management level in implementing a systematic approach to addressing safety on the railway but stressed that much more needed to be done, especially to ensure that the systematic approach applies at all levels in the company.
Senators are aware of the complexity of the rail service. It involves locomotive drivers, service engineers, track maintenance teams, level crossing operators, station staff and many others. The service will not work satisfactorily if these elements do not co-operate perfectly and this too is one of the report's most important messages.
The consultants estimated that a 15 year safety investment programme costing of the broad order of £590 million will be required. This overall expenditure requirement includes about £230 million for a programme of improvements to rectify safety deficiencies in the railway infrastructure, including track, signalling, bridges and level crossings. Of that £230 million, about £60 million is earmarked for improved management of infrastructural safety.
The consultants suggested the expenditure of a further £60 million to improve safety management systems generally throughout the railway and £20 million per annum over the same 15 year period for ongoing renewal of the permanent way. About £23 million of this £590 million needs to be spent immediately and about half the total should be spent in the course of the five year plan. The plan lays out what must be spent immediately on urgent safety measures and the systematic follow through over the course of the five year plan.
The programme for improvement is carefully mapped out. The programme for the first three months is broken down month by month and thereafter on a six monthly and yearly basis. It presents a challenge to this and future Governments. Successive Ministers will be obliged to regard this report as the bible of rail safety. It will be extremely difficult to find the money to implement the findings of the report but it will be even more difficult to maintain the present momentum and to continue with the safety plan as time goes on. However, the report was commissioned by the Government and must be implemented by this and future Governments.
I intend to commission an annual audit of the safety programme and to publish those audits so that the public, those who work and travel on the railway and those who govern it will see clearly what is being done by Government and by CIE to implement the safety measures proposed in the report.
IRMS concluded that this investment programme would be sufficient to restore the railway to a condition where it could operate at existing timetabled speeds and with a substantially reduced risk to the safety of passengers, staff and the public. The report has pointed out what must happen now. Iarnród Éireann must get the £23 million immediately. The Minister for Finance has said the company can increase its borrowings which are currently at £150 million. The £23 million will come from an immediate increase in borrowing.
The report also provides that a high level group must within three months — that is, by the end of January — produce a detailed plan for how the remainder of the money should be procured over the following years. I cannot predict what will happen after the first three years because my term of office will have expired. However, the group will lay out a plan for how the money will be secured in the next five, ten and 15 year periods and how it is to be used. A detailed implementation timetable will be required.
Despite Deputy Yates's remarks to the contrary, I did not suggest a timetable of three months to produce the plan. The IRMS report recommends that the implementation forum complete its work within three months and I have insisted on that. Two weeks of that three months will be taken up by Christmas but that is too bad. The group is due to have its first meeting next Monday. It comprises officials from Iarnród Éireann, the Department of Public Enterprise and the Department of Finance. This is consistent with the consultants' recommendation that implementation plans should be agreed within three months of the publication of the report.
In the meantime, CIE has been requested to begin implementation of the report's recommendations, giving particular attention to the immediate safety needs identified by the consultants. Pending consideration by the Government of the task force report, CIE will be authorised to undertake borrowings to finance the implementation of the immediate safety measures.
The consultants also paid particular attention to the role of the railway inspecting officer within the Department. The inspecting officer, Mr. John Wesley, is in the House today. He is essentially the Government's railway safety regulator and currently that job is done by just one person. The consultants recommended a significant expansion of the functions of the inspectorate and called for additional staff to meet both existing and future commitments. My Department will immediately begin the process of recruiting two additional railway inspecting officers, as recommended by the consultants. They will obviously have support staff when required.
I am determined to make progress on improving railway safety. With that in mind, I have asked the CIE board member who chairs the company's safety committee to report to me directly at regular intervals on progress. I have also decided there will be regular independent audits on the progress being made on implementing the safety measures. This is in line with the consultants' recommendations and I will publish the results of the audits.
The consultants have clearly identified what must be done to address railway safety. Responsibility for the implementation of the bulk of the recommendations rests with Iarnród Éireann but it will have the full support of the Government in that task. At the Cabinet meeting on Monday the report was formally presented to each member. I met the CIE board on Monday to discuss the outcome of the review and I met 18 CIE unions on Tuesday. I intend to tour the country and to participate in a number of regional workshops over the next few weeks at which the findings of the review will be presented to staff at all levels in Iarnród Éireann.
It is their safety report and it is not right that it should be given to just a select group and not to every worker on the railways. I particularly look forward to hearing the views of individual staff members. They, more than anybody else, will be critical to the success of this venture.
I see this consultative process as a first step in bringing the CIE board, Iarnród Éireann management, the trades unions and every member of the railway staff together to work, with a sense of urgency and common purpose, to fully implement the recommendations of the consultants. The IRMS report provides a clear framework within which we must all work to improve the safety of the Irish railway network.
When I and my husband, on Sunday, 8 November 1997, drove away from Knockcroghery, I gave a great deal of thought to this issue. It was then I decided to commission an international study independent of CIE, although I am sure its studies on this subject are also valuable. I was anxious to have a detached and professional study of the railways. Within two days of that decision I brought it to the Cabinet and it was agreed.
Many of my colleagues told me I was storing up a great deal of trouble for myself. They predicted that the report would cost a great deal of money and wondered what I would do with it. I am glad to have this independent and comprehensive report. I will ensure that its recommendations are implemented during my term of office. After that, the task will fall to other Ministers and Governments. I will rest easier, as will the public, with this charter for action.
Having received the study, the onus is on all politicians to ensure that the annual timetable of work is completed and that the audits are published, debated in the House and disseminated throughout the country. There are about 5,000 workers on the railways and each will be given a copy of the report. I hope to meet as many as want to meet me. I cannot force them to meet me. Eight meetings are scheduled — two in Dublin and one in Cork, Limerick, Galway, Waterford, Athlone and Sligo — at which I will speak with, not to, the workers. Ownership of this process must be vested in those who work the railways.
This is a major challenge not just for this Government but for all Governments. It would have been easier for me to claim that the legislative responsibility for safety rests with Iarnród Éireann. It runs a good system which has good safety measures that are comparable to those in Europe.
Nobody can guarantee safety, much as one might wish it. The German example is amazing. The Germans spent thousands of millions of pounds on the most advanced rail system in the world and, within three months of it being operative, 100 people were killed as a result of a signalling failure. We have put a great deal of emphasis on the permanent ways but the report makes it clear that signalling is potentially far more important than defects on permanent ways. That is right; a signalling failure can plunge everything into chaos.
When the railways were first constructed, great excitement gripped the country, even during the Famine years. Great work went into building the system. The railway gauges in Northern Ireland and the Republic are the same and that will allow transport to be one of the implementation bodies the Northern Secretary, Dr. Mowlam, and I will pursue. The excitement of those years and the tremendous work in consolidating the system is due to be relived. At present, our roads are crowded and are causing environmental and safety concerns but there are more hazards attached to private transport. I believe a love affair with the railways is beginning again and I want to encourage it. I wish everybody in the land who aims to travel on the railways would read it.
I thank the House for giving me the opportunity to speak on this matter. I wrote to both the Leader of the House and the Chief Whip asking for Dáil and Seanad time and the Seanad replied positively immediately. I thank the House for that. I recommend the report to the House and look forward to the debate on it.
