Public Transport in the Greater Dublin Area: Statements.

Minister for Transport (Mr. Cullen)

I had several commitments at the same time and appreciate the forbearance of the House in this matter. I thank Senators for the opportunity to address this House on the progress made in recent years regarding public transport facilities in the greater Dublin area and the proposals in hand for further enhancements and improvements in the coming years.

These are exciting and challenging times for all of us involved in public transport. It is widely accepted that a shortage of investment over a long period prior to 1999 led to a deterioration of services provided and a subsequent lack of confidence by customers in public transport facilities generally. The Government recognises the important role public transport plays in the life of the country and has committed unprecedented levels of investment for the upgrade of the necessary infrastructure to meet present and future demands. In the six year period from 1999 to 2004, the Exchequer will have spent just over €2 billion on modern fully accessible buses; increasing capacity and improving facilities on the rail network; the introduction of the Luas; and the development of bus priority measures around the country.

The projects undertaken have impacted on all regions of the country from new rolling stock, track work and signalling on the mainline rail network to the rural transport initiative for the less densely populated areas. However, today's debate refers specifically to the facilities provided in the greater Dublin area and I will confine my comments to this region. It is vital that Dublin, as the nation's capital, has in place an efficient public transport system that allows industry to prosper, tourism to develop and people to travel to and from their employment locations in the shortest possible time. That the population of the greater Dublin area is continually rising and that there is a low-density spread in residential areas provides a challenge for public transport. This must be met and the actions taken to date and those planned for future years will help to relieve congestion and allow traffic in the greater Dublin area to flow again.

Last July, the regional planning guidelines for the greater Dublin area were adopted. This means there is now a robust planning framework to help in planning to meet the transport challenges facing Dublin and the greater Dublin area in the future. This framework will also help to achieve better integration between transport and land use planning. This integration is very important in ensuring sustainable development, which, in turn, will help to eliminate congestion in the greater Dublin area. The regional planning guidelines provide a clear context and direction for future investment to take place within the greater Dublin area up to 2016. Moreover, these guidelines have statutory backing as local authorities must demonstrate that they have had regard to the planning guidelines.

The relevant agencies investing in transport in the greater Dublin area are assessing their plans in the light of the guidelines. In particular, the guidelines provide an important guidance to the Dublin Transportation Office in its input into all development plans and planning applications in the greater Dublin area. With this in mind, I will deal with the specific elements of public transport addressed in recent years, where progress has been made and for which there are significant plans.

The two Luas lines from Tallaght to Connolly Station and from Sandyford to St. Stephen's Green are now operational and passenger numbers exceed expectation. Services on the green line to Sandyford commenced at the end of June 2004 to wide public acclaim with a satisfactory level of patronage achieved to date on the line. Numbers travelling exceed 20,000 per day with passenger numbers particularly strong in the off-peak hours. Services on the red line commenced at the end of September 2004. The target journey time from Tallaght to Connolly Station is 43 minutes with expected daily patronage of approximately 40,000 when full services are operating.

Since 30 June 2004, the Luas system has carried in excess of 3.5 million passengers. Park and ride facilities are an important feature in promoting the Luas network. The Railway Procurement Agency provides over 1,600 spaces at its park and ride facilities at Balally, Stillorgan and Sandyford stops on the green line and at the Red Cow on the red line. An additional 450 spaces will be provided as part of a private development near the Tallaght stop, which will be completed soon.

With the first lines in place and operational, the Railway Procurement Agency is now advancing plans for extensions of Luas to the docklands and Cherrywood. These plans will include private sector funding captured through levies under the Planning and Development Act 2000, from developers who own land along a proposed route. The Department is awaiting business plans from the Railway Procurement Agency to assist in its evaluation of both extensions.

I have also asked the Railway Procurement Agency to examine the possibilities of linking the two existing Luas lines and I am awaiting its report. Based on preliminary analysis, the agency has indicated that, arising from recent traffic management measures introduced by Dublin City Council, including an active policy to remove traffic from the city centre and the delivery of quality bus schemes, the environment across the city centre appears to be more conducive now to Luas than in the past. I understand the scheme could add a further 20% to Luas patronage, which would mean in excess of 7 million new Luas trips per year.

Iarnród Éireann expects the demand for services along the DART and all of its other suburban rail lines to increase substantially in the coming years. In July the company submitted to my Department a business case for the development of an integrated rail network for the greater Dublin area up to 2016 at a cost of almost €3 billion. The proposals involve an increase in capacity through the introduction of additional rolling stock and the extension of platforms; the upgrade of signalling to provide for additional train paths; and the construction of a new station in the city centre. The proposals represent the opportunity to expand significantly the capacity on the rail network in the greater Dublin area, particularly along the Kildare and Maynooth lines where major housing development will take place. The construction of an interconnector tunnel linking Heuston Station to the docklands also forms part of the programme.

My Department is assessing the business case and I will be able to make commitments over the coming period on several key aspects of the plan which are deliverable in the short to medium term. However, already some significant elements of the plan are under way. The first phase of the DART upgrade will be completed in 2005. This involves increasing the power supply, replacing overhead lines and lengthening platforms. When coupled with the introduction of 40 new DART railcars, this will result in a 100% increase in DART capacity since 2000. The second phase of the DART upgrade, to be completed by the end of 2007, will improve signalling and allow for an increase in the number of trains that can cross from Connolly Station to Pearse Station at peak times.

The introduction into service in late 2003 and early 2004 of a new fleet of diesel railcars, 80 of which are already in service, has substantially increased capacity on the suburban rail services. Other major improvements achieved on the rail network since 2000 include new, longer trains on all services into Heuston delivering a capacity increase of 130% in December 2003 alone. On the Maynooth line, the track work was doubled and new diesel railcars were assigned to the route in 2000.

This capacity has been further increased by 25% in the past year with the addition of new rolling stock. Capacity increases of over 40% have been achieved on the Dundalk route. In addition, the refurbishment of Heuston Station has been completed. Four new platforms have been provided and the signalling on the approaches to the station has been replaced. On the Kildare route, new turnback facilities have been provided in 2003 at Hazelhatch and Portlaoise, allowing frequency increases along the line into Dublin.

Buses also play a vital role in providing public transport services in the greater Dublin area. The network operated by Dublin Bus, Bus Éireann and private operators is essential in the fight to persuade more people to leave their cars for the public transport alternative. Under the national development plan, Dublin Bus has purchased 460 new buses to date, of which 93 are additional and 367 are replacements. These buses improve the quality and reliability of the fleet as well as providing for increased services. This has resulted in a 25% increase in Dublin Bus peak hour capacity since the beginning of the national development plan. Proof that expenditure in expanding and improving the bus fleet is paying off is provided by the Dublin Bus passenger numbers, which have been growing steadily in recent years and in 2003 exceeded 149 million. Bus Éireann also has a successful story to tell. Bus Éireann has increased its capacity by approximately 40% from commuter towns such as Drogheda, Navan and Naas to the city centre.

The main focus of traffic management schemes is bus priority measures, as well as enhanced park and ride measures and improved interchange facilities between bus and rail. Considerable investment is being made in such facilities at present and the results are good. Dublin is at the upper end of success in terms of bus lanes as a percentage of the total road network, when compared with other international cities. A key element for easing congestion in the greater Dublin area is the delivery of quality bus corridors. Good progress has been made in rolling out bus priority schemes. Nine QBCs have been commissioned to date regarding Malahide, Lucan, Stillorgan, Finglas, north Clondalkin, Rathfarnham, Tallaght, Swords and Blanchardstown. Further QBC roll-out is being prioritised with funding through the Department's traffic management grants of €27 million for 2004.

The QBCs are making a significant contribution with greater patronage and increased speeds. For example, bus patronage on QBC routes at peak periods increased by over 60% between November 1997 and November 2003. Bus speeds on the QBC sections of bus routes increased by 14% during peak hours between November 2002 and November 2003.

There are those who suggest that Dublin's transport problems could be solved by congestion charges and London is cited as the best experience in that regard. It is my view that congestion charges should only be considered for Dublin when the many measures now being put in place to improve public transport services and to expand and enhance the roads network at strategic locations around Dublin city, have been fully evaluated and are fully operational. Discussions have been taking place with the relevant agencies regarding the use, by buses, of hard shoulders on roads, particularly those linking Dublin and satellite towns. Making hard shoulders available to buses would help operators to meet their schedules. This would make buses a more attractive and feasible option, and contribute to a modal shift from the private car to public transport.

A very significant amount of development and enhancement work has taken place on the public transport network in recent years. More is needed and my Department, together with the implementing agencies, is continually monitoring the investment programme to ensure the right projects are pursued at the right time. Significant progress is being made in the battle to tackle congestion. With car ownership levels continuing to rise, the challenge is still a major one. However, the scale of this Government's commitment to investment is public transport is significant. I look forward to next year when further projects are completed such as the M50 and the port tunnel, which will handle thousands of trucks, buses and cars each day. I look forward to next year when the DART and suburban rail are operating at greatly enhanced capacity, when the Luas lines are delivering on their planned levels of patronage, and when further traffic management measures are in place. Much of the investment is paying off and there is much more coming down the track in a short space of time. I apologise to Senators as this is a debate that interests me, but I am committed to the Road Traffic Bill 2004 at the same time as I am here. Unfortunately, I had very short notice of this debate.

Mr. B. Hayes

I would like to share my time with Senator Terry. I welcome the Minister to the House and I understand the difficulty in being in two or three places at the one time. I appreciate the fact that he made this statement today. I thank the Leader for organising this debate. This matter arose last week on the Order of Business and she organised the debate in a very short period of time, which we all appreciate.

I live on the Luas line in Kingswood Heights in Tallaght, where there now is a new Luas station. There is a great deal of pride in our community about Luas. It is a terrific service and we will leave the fact that it was two years behind schedule to another debate. If a quality public transport system is provided, people will use it.

There are other things we can do to make sure even more people will use Luas. American transport economists tell us that if a person lives more than eight to ten minutes walking time from a station, then that person will use a car. We can make Luas an even greater success if we operate feeder bus services from outlying communities to the Luas line. The Minister might argue that the capacity is not there. The Tallaght line has a smaller capacity than the Sandyford line because of the rolling stock. It is crucial that we have feeder bus services that will bring people to the line to ensure more people use the space that is there.

The Minister mentioned that 3.5 million passengers have used both lines to date. Has a survey been carried out to find out if people have made that modal shift from private car to public transport? There has been a 40% reduction in the use of the bus in my own area. None of us wants to see Luas succeed at the expense of Dublin Bus. We have to be much more innovative in the way in which we bring people to the line to encourage the expanding community to use it.

The issue arose last week about an interconnection between the blue line and the red line. I appeal to the Minister to be open minded about how we can connect both lines. It is ridiculous to have this modern, state-of-the-art transport facility, without a means of connection between both routes. I know that there is a problem at the top of O'Connell Street and O'Connell Bridge because up to 40% of buses traverse that junction. That is a problem, but we may well be able to connect them in another way.

Why can we not connect them between Harcourt Street and James's Street with a new stretch of roadway? In the short term, we could have a free shuttle bus service that will get people from the Tallaght line to St. Stephen's Green and vice versa to make sure there is interconnection between the two lines. It is a crying shame that in our plans over the past few years, we did not produce the right planning ingredient to ensure a surface connection between both lines. The Minister’s comments last week were very positive on the attitude of Trinity College in terms of taking a chunk of the provost’s front garden and moving it up this side of the city. We need an interconnection.

One problem that has emerged is that of accidents involving the Luas, particularly on the Tallaght line. This is the case as it traverses many junctions in the north inner city. We need more policing, particularly in the run-up to Christmas, as well as better signage. That would be useful as people are only getting used to the fact that trams are back in Dublin after 40 years. They have to improve their driving habits and they have to learn. A policing presence would help.

I was not against what the former Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, was trying to do with regard to Dublin Bus. It is good to give new routes to competition and to get Dublin Bus to compete with private operators.

I am a great supporter of Dublin Bus, which has turned the corner like no other semi-State company and done fantastic things in Dublin. There is a need for a public sector company that works in tandem with private sector operators. I am not against that in principle. I ask the Minister to take action in that regard. Industrial relations difficulties, such as the stand-off between the former Minister for Transport and the unions, have comprised part of the problem. As a result, decisions have not been taken on the new routes which have been proposed by Dublin Bus.

I am aware of new suburban communities in west Dublin which do not have a bus service, even though there are 2,000 houses in the area. I understand that Dublin Bus wants to provide a service and compete in the market in such areas, but it has been unable to do so because of industrial relations difficulties which resulted in a stand-off over the past six or seven months. I understand that new routes must have the imprimatur of the Minister. I advise him to sanction the many routes which Dublin Bus is prepared to operate. If other private operators want to provide a service in such areas at a reduced cost, or to provide additional services on such routes, he should sanction that too.

The public and private sectors should work together in this regard. The Government should not adopt a stuck-in-the-mud attitude to matters like this. While I welcomed what the former Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, was trying to do I may not have agreed with the way in which he went about it. Dublin Bus is an innovative company which has shown a capacity for leadership in recent years. It has been at the cutting edge of public transport. It needs to be supported, but that support should not be provided at the expense of other people who could also provide the service.

It seems likely that a traffic corps will be established. I would welcome such a development. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform seems to have found 1,000 new gardaí to do the job. I hope to hear the Minister for Transport's thoughts on the matter in the future. There is a need for a dedicated traffic corps in Dublin to move bottlenecks and penalise those who engage in bad driver behaviour.

Many of this city's congestion problems are caused by bad traffic management. I have long argued for a contraflow system on roads with three lanes, including the road on which I live. The system could be managed by a policeman from the traffic corps in the mornings and evenings to ensure that people do not abuse it.

The Fine Gael and Labour Party groups on Dublin City Council have argued for the introduction of car pooling, purely to see if it would work. There is no point in empty vehicles travelling on bus lanes in the mornings. I do not suggest that private cars should do it. If a car has a full load of people, however, we should let it off. Such people should be allowed to use bus corridors. It will be great if the experiment works and it can be cancelled if it does not. I thank the Minister, Deputy Cullen, for coming to the House to attend this important debate.

Ms Terry

I welcome the Minister for Transport to the House. I appreciate that he is quite busy. I welcome many of the transport initiatives to which he referred in his speech. I refer in particular to Luas, which has to be praised because it has been successful. I wish there were Luas lines on the north side of Dublin. I regret that trams do not go to Dublin Airport, for example, or to the Blanchardstown area, where I live. The Taoiseach said recently that the metro will not happen.

Mr. Cullen

He did not say that.

Ms Terry

I noticed that the Minister did not refer to the metro in his presentation. I presume he would have mentioned it if it was going ahead.

Mr. Cullen

It would be very wrong to interpret the matter in that way. I have said repeatedly that it will not be finished by 2007, but it has not been taken off the agenda.

Ms Terry

I wish the Minister had referred to it in his speech as part of the Seanad's discussion on transportation in Dublin. He should have told the House whether the Taoiseach was right to say that the metro has been scrapped and will not be pursued. His comments are all we can rely on at this stage. The failure to put in place an efficient public transport system on the north side of Dublin is an example of the neglect of that area. It is not good enough.

I wish to discuss the Minister's regional strategic planning guidelines, which are supposed to lead to sustainable development. I would like the Minister to accompany me on a journey through parts of west and north Dublin, so he can see what the guidelines have done to the area. An Bord Pleanála is granting planning permission in the area on the basis that public transport will be provided. The Minister knows that public transport is not being provided in a way that will adequately deal with the level of development being approved. I encounter problems every day as I travel along the Navan Road on my way to Dublin city. Similar difficulties are found on the north side of Dublin.

Blanchardstown cannot cope with the additional traffic which is passing through it as a result of suburban development on the north side of Dublin and in County Meath. An Bord Pleanála should not grant planning permission in the absence of an adequate public transport system. It has approved the development of 2,000 houses on the site of the former Phoenix Park racecourse and almost 2,000 units in Pelletstown, which is approximately a mile from the Phoenix Park. I could mention several other developments in that area.

The provision of a rail link to the airport is absolutely necessary in the interests of the sustainability of industry and tourism in Dublin and the surrounding region. I ask the Minister to prioritise the establishment of such a link, which could serve towns such as Ballymun and Swords as well as Dublin Airport. A link to Blanchardstown could be provided at the same time.

Dublin will grind to a halt if we do not provide the integrated infrastructure that is necessary. I welcome the improvements on the railway line between Connolly Station and Maynooth, which were mentioned by the Minister. While people recognise that the line has improved and are using it in greater numbers, many more of them would use it if further improvements were made.

I would like to speak about park and ride facilities, which I promoted as a member of Fingal County Council between 1991 and 2002. None of the park and ride services which were earmarked by the council every time it compiled a development plan, has been delivered. If we develop park and ride facilities outside built-up areas, we will encourage those who are travelling in cars to use buses to continue their journeys to the city centre.

Mr. O’Toole

Hear, hear.

Ms Terry

I do not understand why incentive schemes have not been put in place to encourage private individuals to provide such services. The Government will have to step in if the private sector continues to fail to get involved. It is an outrage that there are no park and ride facilities in north or west Dublin.

The national development plan contained a commitment to the provision of 250 additional buses, but just 93 have been delivered. I cannot see how the Minister will make up the difference before the Government's term ends in 2006. I ask him to examine this matter. Buses can be provided much more cheaply than Luas lines or other railway systems. If the Government delivers the promised number of additional buses by increasing the number from 93 to 250 as it promised in the national development plan, it will have the necessary impact.

It grieves me that the Dublin Port tunnel project has taken so long and that the costs involved have increased by tens of millions since it was first promised. It seems that the tunnel will not be completed before the end of 2005. I left Castleknock at 7.30 a.m. one day last week when I had to travel to Dublin Port. After I had been to the dock, I travelled back to Castleknock but did not arrive until 10.15 a.m. It took me two hours and 45 minutes to make the entire journey on an ordinary morning. I was shocked to see that many trucks, which are doing great damage to the environment of Dublin, were stuck in traffic coming out of the port. The cost over-runs and delays associated with the provision of this infrastructure are damaging the city's commercial life and tourism.

I welcome many developments, but much still needs to be done. I hope that under the new Minister matters will move forward far more quickly.

Mr. Dooley

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, to the House, and also the Minister, Deputy Cullen, who was here to speak in a transport debate for the first time since his appointment to the Department. We are all delighted he has taken on the role and is up to speed so quickly, as is Deputy Callely. Based on the statements emanating from the Department of Transport, there will be a continued vibrancy in the office, ensuring that matters will be dealt with in a comprehensive and coherent way, something we have come to understand and expect from that Department.

It is timely that we have this discussion on transportation in Dublin, requested last week. This is important for several reasons as there seems to be an element of rewriting history, both in certain sections of the media and in the Opposition. One might almost be forgiven for thinking that the transport sector was in crisis. There are issues and difficulties, as there will always be with a developing environment and growing population, particularly that along the east coast. However, due consideration and recognition must be given to the level of investment and commitment from both the present and previous Governments. The issue should not become a political football. It is useful to have the debate in this House, where the approach is less partisan and where ideas can be discussed openly so that they can feed into the strategic thinking of the Ministers and the Department.

The Minister clearly outlined for us that under the NDP from 2000 to 2006 more than €2 billion would be spent on public transport capital projects. There is no doubt it will deliver impressive increased capacity in bus and rail transport in the city, which is very welcome. We have all seen the increases in quantity and quality regarding network availability. Since the introduction of the national development plan in 2000, Iarnród Éireann has almost doubled its capacity on the network in and around Dublin. As Senators will be aware, this is funded by both the Government and the EU. An additional 100 diesel railcars are used to deliver that service, most of them operating on suburban services in the greater Dublin area.

One probably has to consider transportation in Dublin in several circles, starting with the external one feeding in and out of suburban areas, and then continuing in stages. The central issue is management of traffic in the city's central zone, followed by the question of how to cater for the nearer suburbs. Iarnród Éireann's commitments and the investment it has made to increase service levels on the city's periphery have been most welcome.

Let us take one or two examples, considering such places as Maynooth, where the increase in frequency has been approximately 124%, going from approximately ten to 20 railcars. There have also been significant increases on the Dundalk line of approximately 43%. On the Gorey-Arklow line, the figure is 30%, and Kildare's will be 160% when work is completed. It might be a little repetitive to talk about what has been done, but it is important to get the information into the public domain. There has been considerable negative comment regarding the delivery of transport infrastructure in the city. It is important that we feed into the debate and ensure that the facts are clearly recorded.

There is the same level of continued service with the DART, where capacity has almost doubled since 2000. We have gone from 80 to 154 DART cars on the line. Due recognition should be given to Iarnród Éireann. I will speak presently of Luas, which is doing an exceptional job. However, the DART is still performing exceedingly well given its geography and based on the increased levels of investment it has been given. The service it delivers is still exceptionally good value for money and we should not lose sight of that. The debate on the Luas and the metro sometimes disregards the increased levels of investment in conventional diesel rail to the periphery and the DART.

There has been a great upgrade to the DART service, something with which the Minister dealt. I understand it has largely been completed on the south side, with construction ongoing at weekends on the north side. As well as the new DART I mentioned, there will be several phases to the overall upgrade of the system, including improved access and longer platforms to cater for the longer trains now expected in light of the upgrading of power supplies. That will obviously provide much needed increased capacity on the DART. The cost is approximately €176 million but unfortunately that significant investment has not been recognised by our friends opposite. When the second phase is completed, there will be an increase of 30% to 35% in capacity, amounting to 6,000 extra customers per hour at peak times. It is easy to look at the figures and the amount of money invested, but one must consider the impact on the lives of commuters and the fact that the system is dealing with 6,000 extra customers per hour at peak times.

The Minister has addressed the second phase of the DART upgrade regarding signalling in and around the city. This will ameliorate the current bottleneck, moving from 12 trains per hour in each direction to 16. That will really improve connectivity from north to south, an issue that has already been raised. The number of tracks from Kildare will also be increased from two to four, which will lead to a very significant increase in activity levels on that line, from approximately 2,500 to 15,000 passengers per hour. That massive extra capacity should not go unnoticed. The investment is approximately €300 million, with a 15-fold increase in service levels.

The Luas has been discussed in detail by several speakers. It has been a great success, and I do not think that there has been any negative comment since it started. There has been a little tittering about some minor accidents but more accidents of this kind, such as cars scratching each other, take place on two or three miles of any road in the city than on the entire Luas line. It would have been very foolish of people to expect that there would be no incidents, given the change in culture associated with the new system. We should congratulate all those involved in this House and elsewhere, especially the RPA for its work in delivering on time. Of course, the Minister and Minister of State must receive just recognition for their work in that regard.

Right from the start, Luas has provided frequent, reliable, convenient commuter services. There is no negative aspect. There was a great deal of comment by certain people who wondered what political party and what Minister would have the guts to take on a project of its size, recognising its impact on commuters' lives through the construction phase. I am delighted to have been in the party in Government at the time that was prepared to bite the bullet, take the tough decision, provide the investment and, to some extent, suffer the pain of negative publicity accompanying construction work. Now that is in the distant past and we have a really first-class service. It is great to see that its extension to new areas is now being considered. I very much welcome the Minister's comments regarding the connection of the red and green lines.

The level of confusion in that regard is probably unfair. When the Minister said he believed it necessary to connect the two lines, in some people's minds this was an automatic indication that the metro would not go ahead. Tonight Senator Terry said yet again that some comments from the Taoiseach meant that the metro was now off the track or was to be scrapped. I have listened relatively intently to the leader of our party on many occasions and read his comments on that issue with interest. He did not mention the scrapping of the metro project, nor did he indicate it was off the agenda. He said it was unlikely to be completed by 2007, but that it was still part of the overall strategy towards a solution for public transport in Dublin. This is something we all recognise.

Senator Norris and I are members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport, and took part in the commissioning and development of a report which recognised the need for a connection between Dublin city centre and the airport. We believed, based on the recommendations of that report, that a metro was the best way to achieve this. There are a couple of issues surrounding the project. The metro has to be part of an overall budgeting strategy, which is for the Department to deal with. Some members of the committee went to Madrid to look at what they achieved in delivering a more cost-effective metro service. There are arguments relating to the ownership of land, particularly with regard to the extent and depth of ownership. In Madrid, any land below a certain depth was owned by the state. The significant costs associated with the purchase of land was no longer an issue, but it must be addressed in Ireland. That requires a review of the constitutional right to ownership. I hope the Minister would be prepared to look at the matter. There are also safety issues, with regard to building a single or twin tunnel, and these must also be addressed.

I support the concept of a metro between Dublin city centre and its airport. However, it must be part of an investment list which gives due recognition to the regions. We must get away from the idea that because there is a crisis in Dublin, all investment should go into Dublin. Today's debate is about Dublin, and the rest of the country will be dealt with another day. However, when the Minister is developing a policy or budget within his Department, or with the Departments of Finance and Environment, Heritage and Local Government etc., available moneys should be shared in terms of delivering infrastructure for all the people of Ireland, not just in the Dublin region. This should feed into the timeframe associated with the delivery of a metro service. One can always work a little from behind. As demand and population grow along the east coast and Dublin, one is always playing catch up.

It is similar to decentralisation. Is it not better to develop the regions? Is it not better to develop a counter-balance along the west coast, building a level of infrastructure to encourage people to live there? It would, to an extent, stem the continued accelerated growth in the city. There are Members present from the Dublin area who will want to see continued investment. However, as long as I am in this House I will continue to fight for the west of Ireland's slice of the pudding.

An Cathaoirleach

We are in Dublin now.

Mr. Dooley

I accept that, and I am delighted to be here for a couple of days. Both myself and the Cathaoirleach must return to the mid-west.

While I am not taking from the debate on Dublin, it is part of the balancing exercise. There are others with a similar belief. That is another day's debate, and I will be putting forward those issues. I was dealing with the macro-issue today in terms of priorities. We will deal with the micro-elements with regard to what requires funding at a later stage.

We are getting a fourth river crossing in Limerick, which will be hugely beneficial. The port tunnel is a fantastic piece of infrastructure; 4.5 km of motorway at a cost of €685 million. Approximately 9,000 trucks per day will be taken off the streets. That is extremely significant. I do not know if the Minister agrees with some of my views on the west of Ireland. However, as there is such a level of investment and delivery, it baffles me why there is a continuous whinge about what is not being done. If we started doing the same about the west of Ireland, we would be here for a month.

Mr. O’Toole

With the permission of the House, I wish to share time with Senator Norris.

An Cathaoirleach

That is agreed.

Mr. O’Toole

I am glad the Minister has returned to discuss the state-of-the-art modern transport system in Dublin which he mentioned en passant last week. The Minister made no reference in his speech to the Navan line. This was in the national development plan when it was first published. It is crucial this issue be developed. It would take much pressure off the N2 and N3, and would provide a service to satellite towns. I ask the Minister to respond to the issue at some stage and let us know the Government’s plans.

We should have a start date for the metro project. I do not blame Senator Terry for having a view. There is no point people on the other side saying they are committed, when we all know it must be done. I believe it will be done, and I do not think the Minister or Government have pulled back from it. It would be madness if they did. However, we should start it now.

Members of Fingal County Council and the recently retired Fingal county manager, Mr. Willie Soffe, had a proposal with regard to the metro. They made a solid business, social and infrastructural case for the extension of the metro to Swords. In its development plan, the county council pencilled in space for stations in Swords. Much of this will be achieved on a neutral cost basis, paid for by developers. We should examine this, as well as the issue of public private partnerships in such arrangements.

There has been much talk about the height of the port tunnel, and Senator Morrisey has raised the matter on a number of occasions. The previous Minister for Transport dealt with it clearly. When I spoke on the matter before, I said we needed a decision on it. I said if the Minister decided not to increase the height, the obvious consequential decision was to ban "super-cube" trucks from the city altogether.

Mr. Norris

Hear, hear.

Mr. O’Toole

Nobody can object to this proposal. I tested the height of tunnels in France and Italy and other European countries. There is nothing particularly wrong with what we did. It has been presented as being reactionary, but I do not accept that. I have been overtaken on my bicycle by these big "cubes", as I call the supertrucks. They are frighteningly dangerous and create a slipstream, similar to a Ferrari, which sucks people in. The competent decision arising from not increasing the height of the port tunnel is to ban these trucks from our roads. They are going to come to the city, and the solution will be worse than the problem. There is a slight gain, in terms of economies of scale, for transport people. However, the cost of impact on road infrastructure is massive. These trucks have treble the impact on roads compared to ordinary vehicles.

I have not heard the Minister mention the issue of Operation Freeflow. We are coming up to seachtain na Nollag, and we need to bring it into operation immediately.

Senator Brian Hayes said he would not object to introducing competition for Dublin Bus, and he praised the company. I am glad he did, because it deserves praise. It has hugely improved its service. The Senator spoke of bringing in private competition. I have an agnostic view on the matter. I am neither in favour nor against private or public transport. If we introduce competition, there must be fairness to all. Those allotted city routes must provide Sunday morning services. A route allotted in the country must, for example, cater for one's granny going to the dispensary from Dunquin on Sunday morning. In order to have a level playing pitch, a certain level of service must be provided.

I intended to point out that I could not find any park and ride facility on the north side of the city, but until I heard Senator Terry speak, I did not know there was none. That is quite appalling. My route to town runs through the Finglas area. The Finglas QBC is probably the most successful such bus lane in the city. Apart from a minor hold up for buses at Hart's Corner it is free flow all the way and is an absolutely dependable service. However, there is no park and ride facility. People leave their cars in pub car parks and the like. This causes major problems although it is the least technical of issues. There is plenty of space on the periphery of the M50, along the N2 and even the N3, Senator Morrissey's area, for major park and ride facilities and these should be put in place.

We should be given a start date for the metro.

Mr. Norris

Hear, hear.

Mr. O’Toole

We should ban the super-cube transport from the city and immediately begin the line to link the Luas services. Let us ignore the begrudgers who say that will tear up the city. It needs to be done; let us do it. We should also have compulsory purchase orders which would allow the construction to proceed. If people object to compulsory purchase, the money offered should be put in the bank, as is done in many European countries. People should be informed of the amount of money being offered to them and also be told that the building of a road is going ahead. They should be told that if they want to appeal, a fair appeals structure is in place which may or may not award them more money, but they should not be allowed to stop the project going ahead.

Mr. Norris

I thank my colleague, Senator O'Toole, for his generosity in sharing his time with me. I fully agree with his views on the Dublin Port tunnel. He has highlighted the crux of the matter. The tunnel was built to relieve the congestion caused by large commercial vehicles in the city centre. It would be absurd if we simply used the existence of tunnels to dislodge the worst of these commercial vehicles and those most hostile to ordinary civilian transport, if I might call it that, in the city.

There are transport problems in Dublin just as there are in many growing European cities. It is estimated, for example, that between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m. each day there are 460,000 journeys in Dublin, 71% of which are by car. The vast majority of these cars have only one occupant. All public transport modes available can at their maximum stretch cater for only 30% of these journeys. That is the situation. The Luas adds life and is pretty — as Frank McDonald kept telling us — but can never offer a real solution. That is a mathematical certainty.

We have discussed this matter many times in the Seanad. Some of us formed a group to promote the metro and availed of the services of people like Garret FitzGerald, who worked out the mathematics. The Luas is simply incapable of shifting sufficient numbers. As it is on the surface, it not only has the difficulty of dislodging other services, of which we have had experience, but is relatively inflexible in terms of its capacity to increase train length and frequency. At the same time I am not a begrudger. We have Luas, so let us enjoy it. Its sophisticated appearance on the city streets is very nice for those who live along the Luas lines, few though we may be. The Luas has some unintended negative social consequences in terms of further boosting house prices along its lines.

It is true as Senator Terry says that there is no real solution on the north side of the city, which is a pity. There was a regrettable absence in the Minister's speech of any statement about Luas. I hoped he would refer to it, but there is not a single line about it in his speech. Unfortunately, I was not in the Chamber when he was speaking, as I had to be somewhere else, so I do not know if he mentioned Luas. I know that his heart is in the right place.

Some of the safety issues were glossed over and need to be examined more carefully. I warned about this kind of tram system five years ago in the House but other cities have learned to live with the safety issues and there is usually a decline in the frequency of accidents. The issue was discussed at the Joint Committee on Transport. As Senator Dooley said, the question of our culture also arises. We are all amber gamblers. People drive their vehicles not just through amber lights but through red lights if they see an opportunity. They can then be hit by the trams. Once again, a north side bias is evident. The Luas line on the north side of the city started late, has a smaller capacity than the line on the south side, is less frequent and has experienced the majority of accidents. All this helps to make the case for a proper transport system.

It is clear that the signage is inadequate to prevent accidents. One could argue that in terms of comparative signage, there are plenty of signs. Perhaps they are not designed in a sufficiently eye-catching manner. We may be suffering from what I call "sign blindness", a little like snow blindness, because there is a blizzard of signs all over the city. One cannot take them all in. Yesterday evening, I was driving two friends from Los Angeles through Dublin city and I pointed out where the Luas tracks were. They remarked that there were no signs. There may be, but they are possibly not the right signs. A very good suggestion made by the Joint Committee on Transport was that the signs should incorporate pulsing, winking lights such as those warning people at the DART level crossings. The Luas system should also involve CCTV cameras to record the registration numbers of cars driven by those who break red lights.

I am surprised there has been no accident yet in an area which involves special danger, the stretch where public service vehicles such as buses and taxis, along with private cars, share the road for a couple of hundred yards with the Luas trams. That stretch runs from Middle Abbey Street through Beresford Place to the lower end of Gardiner Street. It is quite likely that at some stage, cars will be trapped there by the traffic, and there may be a collision. This should be examined.

Senator Dooley was a little diffident about the metro. He referred to the report commissioned by the Joint Committee on Transport, which wholeheartedly endorsed the metro. The committee was informed that not only was it good value, but a necessity, and that a significant cost would result from failure to install the system. The report was unanimously adopted by the committee established by both Houses of the Oireachtas to look at transport.

Although the Minister did not mention the metro in his speech, he did mention it on a "Questions and Answers" programme a week ago, a programme on which I was a panellist. He said clearly at that time that the metro plan had not been dropped and that it remained Government policy. He contradicted those who said the Taoiseach had unilaterally torn up the metro proposal. I spoke to the Minister of State in the corridor outside this Chamber and asked if it would acceptable for me to put this on the record, and he agreed it would. That is the Government position. The Taoiseach said it is unlikely that a metro could be completed by 2007. That is a pity, but let us not allow this to wither on the vine. This is the most significant transport initiative for the city of Dublin.

As a result of initiatives in which I engaged, the committee brought Professor Melis to Dublin and visited Madrid. Unfortunately, I was not able to visit that city but I am glad other Members travelled there. Professor Melis made the points Senator Dooley iterated, namely, that the system in Madrid was facilitated by the fact that the Spanish Government controlled ground underneath the city and the planning process could be short-circuited as a result. However, he also stated that the parliaments of other cities had passed legislation. That is what we should be doing, namely, asking the Government to prepare legislation to facilitate the putting in place of a metro.

Another significant factor in the Madrid case was how the time problems were overcome. The longer a contract runs, the higher the costs involved. In Madrid there was a series of between six to ten parallel contracts which meant that the line was being worked on by a series of contractors. We should consider using a similar system. Not only is there something in our culture which encourages people to gamble with amber lights, there is also something which allows people to think that, in the interests of their companies, increasing and massaging prices is good. The prices initially reported by the Railway Procurement Agency were bizarre in the extreme. I recall a spokesperson stating on the radio that the project would cost €4.5 billion. The interviewer said that the construction costs would only amount to €1.5 billion and inquired as to what use the other €3 billion would be put. The spokesperson answered, perfectly cheerfully, that it would be used for contingencies and insurance. My attitude to that is: some contingencies, some insurance.

I forgot to welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, to the House. I did not intend any discourtesy. It is only right that I should welcome a fellow northsider.

Mr. Callely

I thank the Senator.

Mr. Morrissey

I wish to share time with Senator Ormonde.

Acting Chairman (Mr. U. Burke)

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Morrissey

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, and I look forward to having good working relations with him and the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen.

The Minister stated earlier that public transport in Dublin faces a number of challenges. That is certainly the case. I am a fan of Dublin Bus and of public transport in general. There has been a great deal of discussion about Luas but people had better realise that even if the system operates at five minute headways on the Tallaght red line, it will only carry a mere 2,000 people between Heuston and Connolly stations at peak hours. There are currently 132 buses on the quays each morning, the routes of which run parallel to the transport corridor for the Luas for 100 yards. These vehicles carry many more passengers than the Luas. Operated by Dublin Bus, private operators and Bus Éireann, all of these buses converge at that point having travelled along Conyngham Road from the west and are obliged to fight for every inch of road space on the quays. The bus lane on the quays is called a QBC but it is not a QBC.

Dublin Bus has invested in 1,200 buses under the national development plan. The company is on record as stating that it would have 200 buses over and above the number it would require if the problem of congestion on our streets was resolved. It costs €50 million to buy 200 buses. I attended a lunch recently at which it was stated that the Small Firms Association estimates that congestion is costing businesses €1 billion. The real figure in that regard is anybody's guess. How long can this be allowed to continue?

We must give serious consideration to the position of Dublin Bus and the way people are transported. We should call QBCs what they really are, namely, bus lanes. There are possibly one or two QBCs but, as Senator Norris stated, they run, like Luas and the DART, mainly on the southside. I have in my possession the QBC monitoring data for November 2003 which was supplied to the steering committee. It refers, on every line, to the Stillorgan QBC and states that if one wants further information, one can obtain it on request. I am not surprised that it is not published and only available on request. When one reads the figures relating to the Blanchardstown QBC, one realises that the name is a misnomer. Blanchardstown as the worst performing QBC. According to the figures, one will get to Bachelor's Walk from Blanchardstown if one travels by car and not by bus. This is despite the fact that capacity on the Blanchardstown route has increased by 50 or 60 buses since 1997. However, the population of that area has increased very significantly. The average speed of a bus travelling on the route at the River Road is 13.92 kph.The position is worse out towards Clonee andin the estates of Clonsilla, Laurel Lodge andCastleknock where the termini are to be found.

It has taken a great deal of time to put QBCs in place but these are not monitored by the police. A QBC was put in place on my estate last December and it is a disgrace to see how it is flaunted each morning. Buses are actually blocked from moving along it. Before the advent of the QBC, they had a better chance of making progress. The Garda does not monitor the QBCs.

I am seeking a more realistic consideration of the infrastructural deficits in our QBC network. As politicians, we will be obliged to take difficult decisions about QBCs in our areas and direct that bottlenecks should be removed in order that buses can travel their routes. We are either in favour of public transport or in favour of private motorists.

In terms of Irish Rail, I am of the view that there is a solution for the north side of Dublin and, as a knock-on effect, for inter-city services also. Last Saturday, my party adopted the Irish Rail commuter plan which is currently on the Minister's desk. I believe it is the only party to do so. It was presented to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport by Joe Maher of Irish Rail last February. Why are we not running with this plan, which has undergone its feasibility study through the DTO model? It takes two years from the day it is bought to the day it is delivered for a carriage to go into service. Commuters expect that one can buy a carriage off the shelf. It is not as easy as that. Decisions taken now will not relieve the situation for two or three years. We must be realistic.

The Irish Rail plan, which will increase the number of commuters from the current figure of 22,000 to 122,000, must be implemented. The advantages of the plan are simple. There is a rail line from Maynooth to Dublin which runs parallel to the N3 and which is grossly under-utilised. There is also a line which runs in from Kildare parallel to the N7. The latter is blocked each day with cars at the Red Cow roundabout. If there was a proper rail system running into the city from Newbridge, Kildare, the Dunboyne-Clonee area, Drogheda and Arklow, congestion on our roads would be relieved. The Luas has proved one thing, namely, if there is a reliable and frequent service, customers will flock to it. As stated earlier, however, even if the Luas were to operate at five minute headways, its impact would not be as great as that offered by the alternatives.

People have asked for a cultural change on the part of motorists. In that context there should be a cultural change within Departments. I recently submitted an Adjournment debate matter on the extension of the travel saver ticket which is tax-efficient for both employer and employee. I received a reply from the Department of Finance which beggars belief. It stated that if it was further extended to allow employees buy tickets directly themselves, it would suggest the introduction of some sort of direct tax relief for all. It further stated that the extension of the scheme in this way would have serious cost implications for the Exchequer. I believe that is incorrect. If the employee was buying the ticket directly, there would be no employer or side component, which is the case when the employer buys the ticket. The reply further states that it would also place a significant administrative burden on local offices of the Revenue Commissioners who must process the relief for employees. Such an attitude must change. People are being encouraged to leave their cars and use buses and are not allowed tax relief because of cost implications for the Revenue Commissioners. What are the current cost implications of traffic congestion? I ask the Minister of State to examine this matter in the context of the forthcoming budget.

The Minister has been poorly advised on the matter of the Dublin Port tunnel.

Mr. P. Burke

The buck stops with the Minister.

Mr. Morrissey

I guarantee if any Member looked at a super-cube and an ordinary lorry, they would not be able to see the difference in height. Goods are leaving the country in super-cubes and there are jobs which depend on those goods being delivered to foreign markets at a cost competitive price. Those who say they should be banned are not living in the real world. Should the business be transferred to Larne, courtesy of the Irish taxpayer who has built a new motorway? I plead with the Minister of State to review this situation.

Ms Ormonde

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and wish him well. I worked with him when he was Minister of State with responsibility for the elderly and he will fulfil his new role well. The introduction of the national development plan has resulted in significant investment to revitalise transport in the greater Dublin area.

The two Luas lines have been a great success. The journey from Sandyford to St. Stephen's Green takes 22 minutes and from Tallaght to the city centre takes 43 minutes. Those are very impressive journey times. When I was a county councillor I travelled from my area to Tallaght and it used to take me over one and a half hours to travel to and from Tallaght. The journey time of 43 minutes is a significant achievement and is welcomed by every Dublin citizen. Commuters can now travel to their destination efficiently and in comfort.

The platforms on the DART line have been upgraded so that those with disabilities have easy access to the trains and this is a significant improvement. Four or five years ago the number of DART carriages per train could not be increased because the platforms were not long enough. That improvement has been implemented and is a step forward which facilitates those travelling to and from the city.

Bus Átha Cliath has increased its fleet numbers. There are too many buses on the road. Given the traffic congestion, the buses overlap one another. In many cases three buses come in a row. If there was no congestion, there might be no need for the extra fleet of buses.

Quality bus corridors, particularly the Stillorgan and Rathfarnham QBCs, have been a major success. They are working very well. The rail services in the outer area have also increased capacity which will facilitate the demand from Kildare, Maynooth and Gorey. I acknowledge there is much more to be done but these are significant steps forward.

The question to be answered is how we can lessen our dependence on the private motor car. Is it the case that bus users are switching to the Luas and therefore the motorists are not being taken off the road? Some action must be taken because the traffic congestion is building up. I needed to bring my car into town in order to collect a big item but I will not do so again. It took an hour to get in and out of the Jervis Centre. I will not bring my car into town for the remainder of this year. It took me one and a half hours to travel home yesterday, which is ridiculous. People must cop on about this situation.

I suggest that an integrated ticket system might be a way forward. A man travelled up from Waterford to St. James's Hospital. He came up by train and crossed the road to travel by Luas to St. James's Hospital but he had to buy his ticket on a different system. It should have been possible for him to buy a ticket at Waterford station to connect with the Luas. Such a system would attract more people to public transport. They should not be inconvenienced in their travel. In this regard I agree with Senator Morrissey's comments regarding a yearly ticket. Employers could produce a yearly ticket for employees with perhaps a tax rebate as a way of attracting them away from using a private car.

The provincial buses all leave from Busáras at 5.30 p.m., heading for the N4, N7 or N9 routes. Why can they not be moved out to the depots near the Red Cow roundabout? That should be considered.

The park and ride system is not working. People still park on the side of the road in Sandyford rather than in the park and ride facility because they will not pay the fee. I was surprised at that attitude and it needs to be examined. I urge the Minister of State to solve the problem of congestion in the run-up to Christmas. If the traffic can be kept flowing, we are halfway to success.

Acting Chairman

Senator Paddy Burke has indicated that Senator Ross may use his time slot.

Mr. Ross

I thank Senator Paddy Burke for his courtesy. It is fashionable and easy to bellyache about public transport and people will do so whenever they are in Opposition. Ministers for Transport are easy targets and they have a very difficult job. I agree with much of what Senator Ormonde said about the improvements which have taken place in transport in the Dublin area in recent times. Not everything has been entirely welcome. There have been appalling and unforgivable delays. They have tested the customers' patience to such an extent that it is almost at breaking point. Having been a private doubter about Luas I have to say to this Minister, the previous Minister, Deputy Brennan, and the Minister who pioneered it, the then Deputy O'Rourke, now Leader of the House, that Luas is a more than welcome innovation. It is almost revolutionary.

When I bought my first car some years ago I thought I would never travel by public transport again. One of the great advantages of getting one's first car is that one avoided what were the horrors of public transport at the time. I now try to find a way to travel by Luas because it is so convenient, comfortable, stressless, cheap and quiet. I welcome it regardless of the cost, and I say that as someone who often complains about the cost of things.

In terms of public transport, however, it is not possible to say it was too expensive because roads, public transport, trains, buses and routes are fairly permanent and that cannot be measured in terms of a dividend or the cost to industry or individuals. One can have a rough guess at what is being saved or guess, per company, what is being saved going by various shorter routes using different means of transport but the actual amount it benefits the nation is inestimable. We cannot tell what it is and in that sense the Luas is a great innovation because we cannot measure in terms of money its benefit to the country, the traffic or the reduction in numbers it effects.

Also, the improvements in the roads, which have been talked about, are massive, revolutionary and welcome, if slow. Yesterday, I travelled from Dublin Airport to my house in Carrickmines and the joy of being able to travel nearly the whole way on the M50 was something completely new and to be welcomed. I completed in 30 minutes a journey which, in days gone by, would have taken me an hour or an hour and a half. That is a welcome development, something we should applaud and not decry. It is something for which the Government, and all Governments, must take some credit and responsibility. In terms of capital spending, we should say "Well done". Credit is due to Senator O'Rourke in terms of the Luas. The role she played in that project is magnificent, and let us not bellyache too much about the expense incurred and its late arrival because we now have it.

The same applies to the bus corridors, which have been very successful in the area Senator Ormonde touched on. The buses race along the Bray road on a daily basis and are attracting more passengers. The Senator made a good point about whether people are moving between the buses and the Luas, and we do not know the answer to that. Despite the immense improvement made in the Luas, and the welcome intervention by the Minister to link the two Luas lines, I am anxious that Dublin University, which is not my constituency but is somewhere in which I have a great interest, should not have some of its territory taken from it.

Mr. P. Burke

The Senator is looking to Seanad reform. He is looking forward.

Mr. Ross

I am sorry I accepted Senator Burke's time.

Ms O’Rourke

It is in Senator Ross's constituency.

Mr. Ross

No, that is not correct. Dublin University is not in my constituency. The graduates of Dublin University are my constituents. It would be very wrong if we decided, willy-nilly, to excise some of that territory without the co-operation and agreement of Dublin University. We have to be careful that modern transport does not interfere with the great heritage we are privileged to have. When I was flying over London yesterday I saw some of its great infrastructure, which we do not have here. They have tunnels, underground stations, enormous structures, which one sees in the United States also, over-ground junctions and fly-overs, something we have not developed here but which we should consider. I say that in the context of expense not being so important. Roads and rail are not something we can measure and decide they are too expensive because in terms of eternity, nothing is expensive.

I want to deal with the Minister's other important role as sole shareholder of CIE. That is a responsible role but I suggest it has been a tremendous obstacle to transport in this country. That CIE has been a monopoly for so long, along with the other great monopolies of the State — CIE, An Post and Aer Rianta — has hindered the particular objectives to which those companies aspire. Their mission has been hindered by their monopolies. I say this in the knowledge that private companies will now be allowed to compete with CIE in certain areas. We should welcome that because it is consumer-friendly, even if the CIE unions do not welcome it. It is important that the new Minister is prepared to challenge, not in a confrontational way, the unions which say there should be no change in this particular area.

It is obvious to anybody that in the modern world we cannot continue with monopolies of this sort. We only have to look at the incredible success of Aircoach running its buses from the airport to acknowledge that this service is consumer-friendly and absolutely necessary in the present context. Aircoach was started by John O'Sullivan, who I believe used to be in Dublin Bus. He set up the business on his own with a very small amount of money but sold it recently for €15 million. That was a great achievement because he set up to compete with the major monopolies from the airport, and he has now expanded his bus fleet. He started off running at a loss. One only had to be on the street outside to see all the empty coaches driving past. It was a disaster to start with but people got used to these particular buses which they found were cleaner, more frequent and more efficient.

Ms O’Rourke

And cheaper.

Mr. Ross

They were cheaper as well. People used them and gave Mr. O'Sullivan the sort of mandate small private competitors need in this area against the great monopolies. The Minister should have the courage — the former Minister, Deputy Brennan, hesitated too much — to insist on competition with CIE, not on one or two particular routes but on all routes because that will benefit CIE also. One only has to look at the difference it made in the airline industry. It will not only be consumer-led but it will also force CIE to make a profit. If the introduction of competition in certain semi-State areas kills the monopoly and even puts the State out of the picture, so be it. If it is run for the benefit of the customer and can be profitable, that is a philosophy the Minister can happily espouse and comfortably say is popular. There is nothing wrong with doing something popular if it also happens to be right. Semi-State companies, particularly in the transport area, are used by certain people to protect particular perches; these people sit on and expand their empire, make sure it does not make a profit, keep competition out and crucify the consumer. I welcome the fact that we are moving away from that philosophy and urge the Minister to take his courage in his hands and promote faster change. We would then see more Luas projects, greater competition in other areas and a better transport system.

We always have plenty of reasons to moan about public transport — it is a national sport. In recent times we have seen tremendous developments in this area, none of them perfect. We should welcome them and encourage all Ministers to continue in this vein.

Ms O’Rourke

I am glad to contribute to the debate. I thank the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, and his Minister of State, Deputy Callely, for attending the debate. I also thank Mr. Maurice Treacy, an official of the Department, for his attendance. We sometimes forget the civil servants who accompany Ministers to the House. They do the hard work and have great experience.

Apart from my strong interest in public transport, my contribution has another purpose. As my comments on a certain issue last Thursday may not have been sufficiently clear, I wish to clarify it for the record. Recently, in the other House, the leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Rabbitte, stated that I had squandered millions of euro when we were forced to return European funds as a result of changing our plans as regards the Luas system. This is untrue and I thank Mr. Treacy from the Department for a note he sent me on the issue. I will read out the note before sending it to Deputy Rabbitte, which should keep him tranquillised for a while. The note states:

Senator Mary O'Rourke

Leader of the House

Your request for details of reallocation of EU funds that had been originally associated with the Luas project refers.

Arising from the reallocation of EU funding for Luas, several new projects were approved. The new projects were: track and signalling work on the Maynooth line; Maynooth line stations; platform extensions; track renewal on the Connolly-Mullingar line; purchase of 16 additional DART cars; purchase of 20 Diesel railcars; and purchase of buses, including 50 double-deck buses, 7 trial buses and 20 buses accessible to disabled people.

The specific funding details are not to hand at present [they are in a store in Finglas] but can be obtained if required.

Maurice Treacy

Public Transport Division

9 November 2004.

Last week was not the first occasion on which Deputy Rabbitte made such an untrue claim. If I recall correctly, Mr. John Fearon, a civil servant, went to Brussels and negotiated the reallocation of the funds in question. This was the first time permission was given to fund bus services using European moneys, not one punt of which was lost to Ireland. When we realised the changes in plans regarding the Luas project could give rise to the funding being returned, we insisted that we should be allowed to keep it, which is what transpired. I am pleased to clarify the matter in the House and thank the Acting Chairman for allowing me to do so.

I am delighted the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, will have statutory responsibility for traffic in the Dublin area. We have had major developments in the area of transport. Listening to them brought to mind the day on which I sought £500 million for track renewal. Without this funding our trains would not run and our railway stations would be closed. Of all the measures I took, securing funding for track renewal gave me the greatest satisfaction because it resulted in trains operating to the highest safety standards. This was an excellent investment by the Government.

We had to make a tough case for funding track renewal over two sessions. Following an unfortunate rail accident in Knockcroghery, when a fish plate fractured leaving two people injured, I visited the site of the incident and saw the condition of the line. I then informed the Cabinet that we could no longer run trains. One's first responsibility is safety, from which everything else follows. I told the Cabinet I could not vouch for the safety of the rail tracks. We obtained the funding and rectified the problem. Rail services and connections are essential, particularly in rural areas where they are a lifeline.

Having hated it until the day before the trams ran, it is amazing that everybody now loves the Luas system. Overnight, we found that people who castigated and metaphorically threw stones at me started to love the Luas system, which was an amazing development. I constantly receive letters from people informing me that, having used the service, they find it wonderful and think I am great. I do not know what to make of Tom McGurk's description of me on RTE as "Mama Luas". Overnight, the sentiment towards Luas changed from hatred to love.

Every time I see a tram on Cuffe Street or pass Dr. Steevens's Hospital on James's Street, I congratulate myself and the Department on holding our nerve. It was amazing that the Luas and I changed from objects of hate to objects of delight. This demonstrates that one must hold one's nerve on major infrastructural projects. To paraphrase the poet, Robert Frost, we have miles to go before we sleep. The Government has much to do.

Senator Ross referred to fly-overs, the Tube and other infrastructure in London. Two weekends ago I visited Paris — it was not a junket but paid at my own expense — and had a lovely time. The city's underground system has been operating for 150 years. Most capital cities have underground systems.

I wish the Minister for Transport and his Minister of State success in their jobs. Over the past two years, we tried to arrange debates on public transport in the House but found it rather difficult. I believe we are entering a new golden era following my golden era as Minister for Public Enterprise.

I am happy to clarify for Deputy Rabbitte what happened to the funding which he stated was squandered and lost to Ireland. Every time he takes a seat on a bus, enters Maynooth railway station or travels by train to Mullingar, I hope he will think of the money which was not lost but well spent. The Deputy signed an accord in Mullingar with another individual but there is no sign of it.

Mr. P. Burke

I wish to share time with Senator Fitzgerald.

Acting Chairman

The Minister is due to return to the House.

Ms O’Rourke

I propose that we extend the debate until 6.45 p.m. to accommodate the Senators.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. P. Burke

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, to the House. The biggest losers in the area of transport will be business people in the centre of Dublin. They are losing business due to traffic congestion. More and more people will stop shopping and doing business in the city centre because there is total congestion and chaos in regard to traffic and parking.

I have great sympathy for the business community in the city centre. They pay the highest rents, car parking charges and rates in the country as well as many other costs. The city centre business community will be the big losers the longer the problems continue. Business after business will move to Liffey Valley, Blanchardstown and the suburbs of Dublin city, a process which can be witnessed daily.

There has been a huge increase in the level of traffic in the city in recent years. In 1997 there were approximately 180,000 cars in the city at rush hour but that figure is now 280,000. While much has been done by the Government in recent years to tackle this problem, it is not enough. I am disappointed with the Minister's contribution. He summed up the situation when he stated:

Park and ride facilities are an important feature in promoting the Luas network. The Railway Procurement Agency provides over 1,600 spaces at its park and ride facilities at Balally, Stillorgan and Sandyford stops on the green line and at Red Cow on the red line. An additional 450 spaces will be provided as part of a private development near the Tallaght stop, which will be completed soon.

That is the situation. Somewhat over 1,500 parking spaces are provided in park and ride facilities in a city where 280,000 cars are on the roads during rush hour. The Minister continued:

Where does that leave the routes? It is a chicken and egg situation. We must wait for the business community or those who own the land to develop it before raising the levies to put in place the extensions to Cherrywood and docklands. I agree with Senator O'Toole that the land for these routes should be acquired by compulsory purchase order.

We must move forward because to wait for others to develop the lands would take years. The owners do not care. In many cases, the value of their land is increasing rapidly. As Senator O'Toole stated, CPOs should be used and the owners compensated. The Government, in conjunction with the Railway Procurement Agency should make plans to progress this. The Minister stated: "These plans will include private sector funding captured through levies." If we wait for levies to be raised and planning permission granted, the process will be a non-starter.

Senator Terry referred to park and ride facilities. When considering how to get a proportion of the 280,000 cars which use the city daily out of the city centre, park and ride would seem a sensible option. The Government, the Railway Procurement Agency or some other agency should buy portions of land where park and ride facilities can be provided at a reasonable cost so that motorists can park and use public transport to travel to the city centre.

I am a great believer in public transport. To have a solid public transport system is a necessary evil. I agree with Senator Dooley on the need for regional balance. Why should every motorist have to travel to Dublin to shop or to leave the country through Dublin Airport? Why can they not travel by public transport? In my case, public transport takes too long and is too awkward for me to use. If there was a system whereby one could, for example, drive for one hour from County Mayo to Athlone to get a train which would travel non-stop to the heart of Dublin city, I and others would use it. However, the public transport system now more or less provides shopping trains or shopping buses with the result that travellers do not use them.

There is no reason we cannot have greater access to Europe from regional airports. Why do the majority of travellers to Spain, Portugal or other destinations have to come to Dublin to leave the country? A vast area from Cork to Donegal and west from Athlone is served by access airports at Sligo, Knock, Galway, Shannon and Cork. Travellers should be able to use these airports rather than having to use the M50 toll road to and from Dublin Airport.

Much work has been done and I give credit to Senator O'Rourke for her work in this area as Minister for Public Enterprise. However, much remains to be done. The Government missed a golden opportunity when it got its wires crossed in regard to taxi deregulation. There was an undoubted deficit in regard to public transport but the Government took the easy way out when it deregulated the taxi industry. Dublin was flooded with taxis rather than buses whereas the taxi industry was correct in its views at that time. While hindsight is useful, there was a public transport deficit in Dublin.

The Government must quickly consider the use of park and ride facilities and CPOs and not wait for development incentives to be put in place because time is running out and the number of cars on the roads is increasing. Some eight years ago, the average number of cars per 100 of population was approximately 27. The then EU average was approximately 55 cars per 100 of population. Ireland has reached the EU average which is taking its toll on our roads and cities. With the affluence acquired over the past ten years, more people are using cars. Solutions must be found to get people out of their cars.

Members referred to the introduction of an integrated ticketing system, a step the Government has no choice but to take. A person should be able to get one ticket for use on Luas and the bus. Many elderly people use public transport and the current ticket system where one needs a separate ticket for Luas and for the bus only complicates their travel. Integrated ticketing will make the whole system easier to use. Senator Ross spoke about the service provided by Aircoach that has been a great success. However, part of its success is due to the hassles of parking at Dublin Airport. People now prefer to travel by Aircoach, leaving their cars at home, rather than facing the hassle and cost of car parking at the airport. I wish Aircoach well as it provides a great service.

Mr. Fitzgerald

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, to the House. I congratulate him on his appointment to the Department of Transport with special responsibility for certain traffic management issues in Dublin and the major cities. During his many years as a member of Dublin City Council, he was never shy about making forceful and critical comments on how local authorities and Government were bringing about a balanced programme for public transport facilities. I hope the same critical faculties, so sharp and vociferous on Dublin City Council, will be to the fore in his new role as Minister of State at the Department of Transport. I will be delighted to share many of those views with him in the future as I have in the past.

Much comment has been made on the large investments made by the Government in the past seven years to develop public transport facilities in Dublin. Investment has also been made to tackle the growing and persistent problem of traffic congestion. Surveys carried out by many bodies, including IBEC, point to this growing problem. One issue, mentioned only briefly in this debate, is traffic congestion in the inner city area within the two canal networks. Congestion in this area is ongoing because economic success is ongoing, leading to an increase in the population of Dublin city. This in turn leads to an increase in use of cars and the flow of traffic through the inner city. City council officials informed me that in the past 30 years, the increase in the throughput of the volume of road vehicular traffic in this inner city area was approximately 33%. This is at a time when the car user population has increased many times. The Government has taken this problem on board by adopting the Dublin transport initiative programme.

Contemporaneous with the development of off-road public transport facilities, such as the upgrading of the DART service, the first phase already completed on the south side of the city, and the introduction of the Luas service, most motorway development must take place in the outer suburban ring of Dublin city. A phenomenal level of development has taken place in this area. Last year, the Dublin city manager commented on the pressures brought on the inner city by the increase in car users. He said that if motorists wished to go through the inner city, they should do so underground. Although a wry comment, it did point to the problem in this area. Any attempt to increase the throughput in Dublin's inner city will see inner city motorways having to be built on stilts or underground. Neither of these proposals is acceptable for various reasons.

I congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, and the former Minister, Deputy Brennan, for the introduction of the Luas service. However, Senator O'Rourke deserves special tribute. As Minister for Public Enterprise from 1997 to 2002, she piloted, protected and enthusiastically promoted the Luas project, often in the face of criticism from public commentators. The extent of her commitment and determination to bring the project to fruition was impressive. Without that, we would not have Luas today. Her efforts have resulted in us now enjoying a wonderful facility that will greatly enhance the image of Dublin city as a tourist destination and contribute to public transport facilities.

I am impressed with the extent of the Government's commitment to the development and completion of the M50. Members spoke about the enhancements to be enjoyed if the project was completed. However, one disheartening feature is the manner in which this necessary project has been held up. Everyone has the right to an appeal. If individuals or communities believe their rights will be infringed or their heritage will be damaged by a project, they have the right to appeal. However, a balance must be struck in the interests of the public good. That balance has not been struck in the succession of appeals causing the blocking of the completion of the M50. At this stage, it borders on the farcical and certainly on the vexatious. It also raises questions about the whole appeals mechanism regarding compulsory purchase orders. I favour compulsory purchase orders being made on a ring of land between Malahide, Swords and Lucan to allow a frontloading of road and rail infrastructure. The suggestion made by Senator Paddy Burke, and others, on compulsory purchase orders must be examined as a matter of urgency by the Department of Transport.

The problems caused by the appeals system must also be addressed. How much are the appeals costing through delays or deferred costs? I have often asked this question but have yet to receive an answer. A deferred project will cost more due to the variation of contract triggered at a later stage. There was the example of the Glen of the Downs motorway where eco-warriors and rent-a-crowd environmental professionals came down to the area to delay a laudable project. Environmentalists and those in the local community conceded there was very little to be saved by this type of action. When one aggregates the cost of these actions and delays, what was the final cost to the taxpayer?

Those figures should be determined, aggregated and published, and the people who must pay the piper should be told so that they can make a balanced appraisal of what this liberal appeal system involves.

The common good should be to the fore at all times. That should be the balancing factor. I thank the Minister of State and look forward to working with him. I am sure that as he moves forward to develop facilities for public transport in his Department we will hold many views in common and will occasionally hold differing views.

Minister of State at the Department of Transport (Mr. Callely)

I appreciate the Senators' statements on the public transport facilities in Dublin and the future plans. Several issues were raised and I will try to respond quickly to some of them. I thank my friend and colleague, Senator Fitzgerald, for his contribution. He asked a relevant question about the planning and appeal process and in particular its costs. I cannot give a total figure for those costs. The appeal process delayed the Glen of the Downs project, and the additional costs, not of the appeal process but of the road project, were in excess of €40 million for a relatively small section of road fairly quickly completed. One recognises, as the Senator does, the right of an individual or a community to appeal should they feel threatened. However, in light of the Senators' comments my officials and I will reconsider this matter to see if there is another mechanism that might assist us to roll out these projects without undue delay, while acknowledging people's right to appeal.

I am delighted we are having this debate. I congratulate my colleague, the Taoiseach, on his foresight in appointing a Minister of State in the Department of Transport with particular responsibility for Dublin and some of the other regions and cities where there are congestion problems. I do not say that because I happen to be a beneficiary of that decision in so far as I received the appointment. I say it because of the need to address some of the issues raised tonight. I am particularly pleased also as a "Dub" to be in the Department of Transport dealing with transport issues in Dublin.

There has been an unprecedented level of expenditure and investment in public transport in the past few years. I concur with Senator Morrissey's remarks on Dublin Bus. He mentioned the infrastructure bottlenecks and I will try to address some of these pinch points where there are serious problems. He said in effect we are either for public transport or private motorists. I differ from him on that point.

Senator Ormonde described the difficulty she had coming into the city to collect a large parcel for which she needed her car. I am trying to achieve the appropriate mix and get it right. We must accommodate the private motorists and ensure that they feel they are being accommodated. We must also give the commuters or the people coming to work the opportunity to decide which suits them best, their private cars or public transport. To do this we need to roll out several projects.

Our rail, bus and road networks need to be fully integrated and we must address issues concerning the quality bus corridors which proved successful early on. There are difficulties regarding bunching of buses and their flow. I have met all the operators in the greater Dublin area in the past few weeks since my appointment, including the quality bus network project office, to address some of the issues that will ensure the continuing momentum of the success of the network. Some new innovative measures may be needed.

Integrated ticketing, in particular a smart card system, is very important. This will enable passengers to hop on or off whatever part of the public transport network they are using and perhaps collect their cars in the park and ride facility. It will not even be necessary to fumble for the smart card because it will work from one's pocket. This will be a great system and I am anxious to roll it out very rapidly.

There is some work to be done on the policy associated with park and ride and who is responsible for the development and who will fund it. There is a mix of people involved in it now, including the local authority and the service provider, depending on who has the landbanks.

The smart card is part of the new intelligence systems available in cars. One no longer uses a key to open the door, the system will detect the card and disarm and unlock automatically. The same applies to intelligent transport systems. If we take an innovative approach to many of the issues raised by the Senators, whether traffic jams, vehicle heights or other problems, and think outside the box about what can be introduced to deal with congestion issues we can solve each of those problems.

The metro and the linking of the Luas lines are on the table and will progress to a satisfactory conclusion. I look forward to working with the House to address several of the issues raised in the best interests of the citizens and the economy of Dublin city.

An Cathaoirleach

When is it proposed to sit again?

Mr. Fitzgerald

At 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht - Tuesday, 9 Nov 2004

Public Transport in the Greater Dublin Area: Statements.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 9 Nov 2004