Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Transport Patterns.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 27 May 2004

Thursday, 27 May 2004

Ceisteanna (6, 7)

Eamon Ryan

Ceist:

5 Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Transport the analysis his Department has carried out on the effect of the doubling in oil prices over the last two years on future transport demand patterns; if he has carried out an analysis on future traffic demands on the road network other than the 1998 roads needs study; the assumptions for the long-term price of petrol that were used in the 1998 study; if his Department has such projections for the price of oil in five, ten and 15 years time; and if he will review predictions of future traffic growth in view of the changing predictions on the future long-term price of oil. [16044/04]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Eamon Ryan

Ceist:

18 Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Transport the analysis his Department has carried out on the likely effect of the doubling in oil prices over the past two years on future transport demand patterns; if the Government has carried out an analysis on future traffic demands on the road network here other than the 1998 roads needs study; the assumptions for the long-term price of petrol which were used in the 1998 study and if his Department has such projections for the price of oil in five, ten and 15 years time; and if the Government will review predictions of future traffic growth in view of the changing predictions on the future long-term price of oil. [15934/04]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (9 píosaí cainte)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 and 18 together.

General responsibility for energy policy is a matter for the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. In August 2003 the National Roads Authority published updated road traffic forecasts for the period 2002-40. The forecasts were based on: a review of the growth factors published in the national roads needs study 1998; estimates of vehicle kilometres travelled in the year 2001, derived from a programme of manual and automatic traffic counts covering local and national roads; population and vehicle fleet forecasts; and forecasts of gross national product. Overall, the forecasts project an increase of 67% in car and light goods vehicle traffic and 86% in HGV traffic over the period 2002-40. These compare to projected increases of 124% in car and light goods vehicle traffic and 88% in HGV traffic in the national road needs study in 1998 for the period 1995-2020. The lower projected growth in car traffic in the road forecasts reflects the major growth that has occurred in the period 1995 to 2001.

The impact of oil price increases was not specifically taken into account in the methodology used in the NRNS or in the more recent forecasts. It is generally recognised that the demand for transport is highly price inelastic and that increases in the cost of fuel will not lead to proportionate reductions in travel demand or road traffic volume. Trends in actual and projected traffic will be kept under review. Sustained changes in traffic volumes and patterns arising for whatever reason, including the impact of a sustained high level of increase in oil prices, will be taken into account in transport planning generally and the planning and design of road projects.

Will the Minister confirm that the key point in his reply is that we have taken no account of the possible projected price of oil in 2040 and that we have no view in that regard in terms of managing future traffic demand? While he states that the demand for transport is highly price inelastic, does he not agree that the real issue is that most people do not have a choice? It is inelastic, first, because corrupt planning procedures have led to the building of housing estates without the provision of other facilities around our cities and, second, because the Department and the Government have refused to invest in public transport. Does the Minister agree that most of the inelasticity is not because people want to drive their cars everywhere but results from the fact that they simply do not have a choice in that regard?

Does the Minister also agree that the one area where choice possibly exists is that of long, interurban journeys because it is possible to choose to take the train from Dublin to Cork, Galway, Waterford or Limerick? Does he further agree this is the one area where we could take into account increasing oil prices and possibly decide to invest in intercity rail links rather than in the motorways on which he is spending the entire transport budget?

I have no idea of what oil prices will be in 2040 and certainly will not plan for them.

There may not be much oil, but that may give the Minister a clue as to what prices may be.

I do not know what oil prices will be at the end of this year, not to mind in 2040. While I know where the Deputy is coming from on this, if we concern ourselves with future oil prices, there will be little else of concern to us.

We have had much discussion on investment in public transport. Between 2004 and 2008 the sum available for investment is €3.5 billion. One billion of that is an operational subsidy investment in the CIE group while the rest is capital investment. The Deputy is aware of the substantial investment now in public transport. A few days ago we announced the opening of the Midleton line. The completion of continuous welded track of the inter-urban lines has brought us to a situation where almost the entire track in the country is new. A substantial amount of new rolling stock and carriages are on order and being delivered on a daily basis. The upgrade of the DART is an enormous investment which is going ahead, particularly at weekends. The Luas is also coming to fruition. An enormous amount of taxpayers money is going into public transport right across the system, in buses, trains and quality bus corridors.

I make no apologies for linking the main urban centres of the State by motorway, although the Deputy and I will never be in agreement on that. This is what the taxpayer and the public would want along with first class rail services between those areas.

The Minister is spending four times more on new roads than he is on public transport in our capital budget. While I agree with the Minister that I do not know what the price of oil will be in 2040, does he not agree it would be appropriate for the Department of Transport to include some analysis of fuel projections given the billions being spent every year on future transport patterns? Does he agree that such an analysis, if it showed a massive increase in the price of oil, might lead him to change his investment patterns from the pattern where we invest four times more on inter-urban motorways to one where we would invest more on urban and inter-urban rail systems that might be cheaper to run in 2020 or 2040, based on oil price predictions? I agree I do not know what the price will be but I would have a good bet that it will be a multiple of what it is now. For the Minister to disregard that fact completely in his planning seems reckless.

When Ministers for Finance prepare their annual budgets, they take a view of oil prices 12 months ahead.

The Minister is investing for a 20 year forecast.

My point is that no matter what country we are talking about, Ministers take a cautious stab at what oil prices might be in the next 12 months. They do not care to go beyond that because that would involve total conjecture. I understand the Deputy's point that if oil continues to rise in price over the long term, we might be better off investing more in trains and less in cars. I understand the Deputy's political view on these matters and respect it.

I have not decided to build roads instead of railways but to build both. I must get on and do that. We hope to have more high speed inter-city trains and more commuter trains such as the Midleton one over the next few months and more investment in modern rolling stock. I look forward to us continuing to develop our rail and bus systems and to investing more in them. The reason the spend on roads is so high is that the spending is peaking now. We did not have a good road network and have had to catch up. We must get to a certain stage.

It is not a competition between road and rail. We must have modern motorways and high-speed inter-city trains between our major urban areas. This country can achieve both if we approach the issue in a determined manner. That is what we are doing. It is not an either-or situation. We need both. If people want to go to Cork or Galway, they must be able to get on a good value high-speed comfortable train, and if they want to drive, they must be able to drive on a motorway. I do not accept it should be an either-or situation. We must press on with both as urgently as we can.

Barr
Roinn