Amendments Nos. 96, 97, 97a and 98 are related and will be discussed together.
SECTION 21.
I move amendment No. 96:
In page 22, subsection (1) (a), line 6, after "Authority" to insert ", after consultation with local authorities,".
This point has already been made — that there should be consultation with the local authorities. This section specifically deals with the programmes of EC assistance, the five year rolling programmes. It is a source of complaint with local authorities that they have no access to Europe. I would not like to see decisions on realigning major European routes taken behind closed doors without local authorities having an input and, in my view, there is a need to provide for this in the Bill.
I support this amendment. This refers to EC assistance and roads, other than national roads, will be included in whatever proposals are made for road development; it is the principle of local authorities being consulted before the plans are submitted.
I too would be anxious that the National Roads Authority would prepare EC programmes in consultation with local authorities. The only area where I differ with the Deputy would be concerning the legal obligation. Much of the documentation for EC purposes has to be prepared to very tight deadlines and I do not feel it is wise to impose a statutory obligation on the need to formally consult with local authorities. The programmes prepared for EC purposes will be based on the National Roads Authority's medium term plan.
Under section 18 there will be full provision for formal consultation with local authorities when that plan has been prepared. At a practical level there will be day to day contact with the National Roads Authority and local authorities as my Department have at present. The NRA will be well aware of the views of local authorities and will, of course, require information from them when preparing the documentation. In the issue of the guidelines, section 39 specifies that the National Roads Authority should, as far as practicable, seek to consult with local authorities when preparing EC programmes and other documentation. The Deputy's amendment makes it an absolute legal requirement. The day to day consultation will be similar to what it is at present between my Department and the local authorities.
The impression may have been given during the debate on the last section that the local authorities are against building any major road through their areas. In some of our progressive local authorities we like to get on with the job and I hope local authorities will have an input in the preparation of programmes. I hope that, with an Operational Programme such as this which had minimum local authority input, at ordinary member level there would be inputs from managers and chairmen, etc. but not the full council, and that there would still be an opportunity to make the case for their areas. Obviously in Wicklow we want to see the Arklow by-pass going ahead. We will make the case as strongly as we can but I hope the NRA will not come between local authorities and the Minister in suggesting where priorities lie and where money should be allocated.
If the Minister is prepared to give a firm commitment that it will be part of the regulations, I will withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 97:
In page 22, subsection (1) (a), lines 6 to 8, to delete "at the request of the Minister and in accordance with such terms and conditions as he may specify" and substitute "in accordance with such terms and conditions as the Minister may specify".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 97a and 97b not moved.
I move amendment No. 98:
In page 22, subsection (2), line 27, to delete "at the request of or".
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 98a and 99 not moved.
I move amendment No. 100:
In page 22, between lines 31 and 32, to insert the following subsection:
"(3) An approved programme under subsection (1) shall indicate the time frame in which European Community standards shall be met.".
This also refers to the EC programme. As one who frequently travels from Wexford to Dublin, I acknowledge that the benefits of the Newtownmountkennedy by-pass and the Shankill by-pass are tremendous. Thousands of motorists use these motorways every day, and if there are ten people in Shankill upset by this, we have to balance the benefits for the many against those of the few. I fully accept that they should be represented but that is my view.
Double glazing is what they need.
The benefits of progress are often understated in this debate. The main issue is to put a time frame on these improvements. That is my priority in this Bill. I fear that next year the priority will be drainage schemes, not roads. Therefore, I would like to have a time frame introduced. We have already debated this so I will not labour the point but there is need to have a programme to bring our roads up to European standards by the year 2010.
I am extremely anxious that in any national programme all the parameters are taken into account. It is not a question of one area being the priority of the month or the year. No matter what other considerations there are, and without any degree of certainty as to how traffic movements are going to develop, if our roads are to be improved the road network will continue to require constant assistance, both financially and physically, over the next decade.
The plan is to complete the national primary routes in approximately 12 years. It is a fairly ambitious target and we will require considerable resources from the EC. There are no Community standards for roads. Each country adopts standards to suit its own requirements. We have our special needs, our special terrain, and we try to meet those needs as best we can.
The Programme on Peripherality and the additional resources we obtain for that purpose from the EC take account of our infrastructural difficulties. However, there is no such a thing as a European Community standard. Whether it will evolve in the next ten or 20 years when these major networks are completed I cannot say, but for the present we evaluate our own problems as best we can, getting the resources to deal with them and targeting the completion of that roadwork over a period of 12 years. We could not be any more ambitious than that.
The Minister says there is no Community standard for roads but there is a national standard and it should be uniform. I hope this National Road Authority will go some ways towards bringing that about because at present there is a super-way from Dublin to May-nooth and from Dublin to Blanchardstown. That has been a great boon for traffic coming into Dublin city — it takes half an hour off the trip — but, from Kells, County Meath, to Aghalane Bridge, County Cavan, the road — the N3 — is a disgrace.
That is why I need your help.
What guarantee do I have that the Minister will bring that road up to the same standard as the roads I have mentioned?
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 100a not moved.
Section 21, as amended, agreed to.