Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I will try to keep this brief. With regard to electric vehicles, it was mentioned that 6,500 are being used as a result of concerted action. I respectfully disagree. We are really going at a snail's pace compared with some other countries. What are the Department's ideas for accelerating progress? In Norway, for example, half of all cars sold last year were electric and over half this year will be electric. We are way behind what other countries are doing in this area. Mr. Doyle stated that the real action will happen around 2035, which demonstrates a lack of ambition in trying to accelerate progress. We need much greater ambition and to try to match leading countries in Europe and elsewhere on this. Why should we not replicate what Norway has done, for example?

Deputy Corcoran Kennedy touched on how this can be communicated. It will happen through certain incentives. Norway piloted a tolling model, with reduced or free tolling for electric vehicles. Could we do something in this regard for a short period to try to drive change? I know there are contracts but we must really accelerate policy actions. I know the Department is trying to drive policy in the area but it is much too slow. We need more ideas and perhaps the witnesses can enlighten us on what other European countries are doing. We have the example of Norway. What can we do with the tax base to really promote electric vehicles? As has been mentioned, 20% of greenhouse gas emissions are transport-related and half of that comes from private cars. If we could replicate what Norway - an oil-producing country - can do in the area of electric vehicles, we could massively reduce our carbon footprint very quickly. We need innovative solutions in respect of tax in order that people can engage in a behavioural change. Our actions thus far do not match those of other countries.

The next issue is the replacement of our bus and rail fleet. Will the witnesses indicate when existing stock will be replaced in order to reduce our carbon footprint? What capital replacement model is in place and how will it affect carbon emissions? There was mention of park-and-ride facilities and trying to encourage commuters to use trains. A new charging system has been implemented at Dunboyne station, for example, and where there used to be many cars parked, there are now none as a result of the prohibitive model being used. This completely contradicts the climate change approach. As Deputy Stanley mentioned, there must be a different model. This may include, for example, integrated ticketing and parking facilities. The current charging system for parking is reducing the number of people who use commuter trains. In addition, planning applications such as the example of the new Broombridge Luas station, which is integrated with the trains, were progressed without any parking facilities. There will be electrification of the line through that station. There is to be another new train station at Pelletstown, with very little provision for parking and, therefore, a massively negative impact on people who live around those areas. We are talking about park-and-ride facilities but the desired impact on the ground in suburban Dublin does not follow. The charging model does not help potential or existing commuters or people who want to live in residential areas where train stations are being developed. I would like to hear more about actual park-and-ride facilities and what is being done in that regard. Currently, tenders are being awarded to private clampers who are punishing people who want to commute. We need a much more positive model of park-and-ride facilities to help commuters.

There have been good changes involving integrated ticketing. The Netherlands, for example, has a cashless model involving e-cards and many public services should transition to that. What is being done to bring about a cashless payment system? BusConnects is dotted throughout this and it is important that the Department and the NTA are cognisant of the democratic decision of Dáil Éireann regarding BusConnects and the rejection of the current proposal, with a request for the reversal of many changes to routes. There has been much spin, including the claim of a 27% increase in services. In suburban areas in north and south Dublin, people will see the opposite happening, with many services being very much adversely affected. These changes are being rejected by people living in those areas. What were the terms of reference in respect of BusConnects? What was the advertising spend on BusConnects specifically? There seems to be a very direct and aggressive campaign to fool people in suburban Dublin about what the people involved want the population to believe. They can read the maps in order to see the real impact. What is being done to radically change BusConnects?