I propose to take Questions Nos. 133, 174 and 175 together.
As the Deputy is aware, in line with a decision of the previous Government, in 2019 Iarnród Éireann commissioned EY Economic Consultants to undertake a financial and economic appraisal of a proposed re-opening of the Western Rail Corridor Phases 2 and 3. This Decision related to a commitment given in the previous Programme for Government and reiterated in the National Development Plan (published in 2018), both of which contemplated a re-opening of the line to passenger and freight services, and committed to having the proposal appraised.
In line with that Government Decision, Iarnród Éireann developed terms of reference for the proposed study in order to procure consultants. As those terms of reference were being finalised, my Department received a copy and provided written observations to Iarnród Éireann with regard to references to the Public Spending Code and the Common Appraisal Framework for Transport Projects and Programmes and related issues. Management of the contract with EY, payment of fees, oversight of EY's work, and acceptance of their Report as the output of that work, were matters for
Iarnród Éireann in line with their contractual arrangements.
Upon completion and submission of the EY report by Iarnród Éireann, my Department’s initial review focussed on a technical assessment of the report as an economic appraisal with reference to relevant Public Spending Code and Common Appraisal Framework guidance. Separately, my Department also commissioned JASPERS - an agency of the EU Commission and EIB - to conduct an independent review of the proposal generally, and the JASPERS Review is available to view on my Department’s website.
As the Deputy will acknowledge, issues such as the frequency and speed of proposed rail services are always of interest in proposals like this, and indeed were raised by consultees during the public consultation process as reported in section 3 of the EY Report. I note that the EY Report states that the operational and design scenario adopted in the analysis ‘was most in line with the comments received during the public stakeholder consultation’ while the JASPERS Review comments that it is ‘ambitious ’.
The Deputy is right to note that an extensive public consultation process was organised by EY as part of their work for Iarnród Éireann. As detailed in the EY Report (see section 3, Appendix B and Appendix C) the consultation process elicited 6,572 unique responses to the online survey and 113 written submissions which are comprehensively summarised in the EY Report itself. I can confirm that the JASPERS Review did not individually review those responses or submissions.