Mr. Willie Noone:

On behalf of SIPTU, I thank the committee for the opportunity to outline our union's concerns regarding the future of public transport and the level of State subvention that is required to ensure that public transport is a mode of transport that can be grown and sustained with high standards of safety, reliability and cleanliness and increased access for all consumers, regardless of whether they are urban or rural based or whether they have disabilities. The workers who provide the service should also have proper and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, as their efforts and endeavours are an integral part of delivering public transport. There is a direct link between under-resourcing and cutting conditions of employment and the subsequent public services that are available for the public.

SIPTU is Ireland's largest trade union and the only union that organises and represents workers across all categories in Irish Rail, Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus in all depots and in all geographical areas within the CIE group as well as representing workers in Transdev, which operates the Luas, and in private bus companies, ports, docks and the aviation sector. Hence, SIPTU is a key stakeholder in public and private transport provision, seeking to represent the interests of our directly employed members through collective bargaining as well as the interests of our wider membership and the citizens at large, many of whom rely on and require an appropriately run, properly resourced - through revenue and appropriate levels of State subvention - and integrated and sustainable national public transport service.

According to a variety of economic indicators, the economy has started to grow again after years of recession. A properly funded and resourced public transport system has the potential to be a spur for sustainable economic growth. However, public transport is at a crossroads, having suffered from chronic underfunding and a decrease in passenger numbers during the period of the economic crash.

We now need an ambitious yet realistic and viable vision for public transport in Ireland to 2020 and beyond. We, in SIPTU, which represents thousands of workers who deliver public transport, want to contribute to this debate from the perspective of not only supporting our members who deliver public transport but also for the tens of thousands of citizens, many of them members of our union and other unions, who rely on public transport as an economic and social necessity.

The provision and resourcing of public transport by previous Governments has been good and bad. The purpose of today's presentation is not to recriminate in terms of who was or was not to blame but rather to expose the facts, outline past and upcoming problems and urge the people whose voices can be heard to influence for the better the manner in which public transport should and could be managed and resourced into the future.

This union is to the forefront in stating that public transport provision is currently under-funded. The strategy for the future is also at a crossroads as the direction and decisions that Government takes when deciding on expanding the tendering of routes in the bus market, the adoption of measures in the Fourth Railway Package, and the level and mechanisms of funding public transport services into the future will leave either a poor or good legacy on politicians who have the influence to drive the necessary changes now that would leave Ireland with a public transport model that consumers and its providers would want. Mistakes in deciding the way forward may not only be costly but the consequences of any mistakes may be long term.

I have provided a detailed report, which I know the Chairman has read, but I will focus on the main facets of that. A report on Government policy in 2008 dealt with a number of headings such as car usage, population, congestion, pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and public transport users, all of which were to increase. The strategy at the time was how to deal with that. In terms of the Government's vision, it was supposed to lead to a shift to public transport, ease of access to public transport, reduce congestion and travel times, cut greenhouse gas emissions etc. A number of the key elements of that report, which was entitled A Sustainable Transport Future - Smarter Travel, have been highlighted, which I will briefly detail. One stated: "...we will consider an extension of the existing school transport scheme". That was supposed to happen. It was supposed to consider fiscal measures aimed at reducing car use; introduce competitive tendering for public service obligation, PSO, services over and above those currently provided by Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann; link the PSO subvention to growth in patronage; offer a seven days a week transport service for rural communities and those in smaller urban areas; examine, as part of the review, the current distance eligibility criteria for school transport, in particular, where it is not feasible to provide safe walkways and-or cycle paths; and review the public service obligation with regard to other services such as aviation etc. What happened, however, was that it did the complete opposite. The numbers carried under the school transport scheme have decreasedinstead of being expanded. Fiscal measures have ensured that car usage is still needed. PSO services that Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus provided at the time were tendered. The PSO subvention was never linkedto growth in patronage. The seven days a week service did not occur. The only plan that was in operation was to reduce subvention, increase tendering of existing services and drive Expressway, in particular, and Bus Éireann into extinction. The subvention was reviewed, and it was reduced. My colleague spoke about the subvention levels as outlined in the report, so I will not repeat that.

A particular exercise was done to compare operating costs that arise from fare box versus subvention. The data is from 2000 but the starkest statistic from that is that if we take the averages in cities like Bologna in Italy, 38% of operating costs come from the fare box and 56% from subvention. In Amsterdam, 25% comes from fare box and 64% comes from subvention. When we look at Dublin, however, 96.4% of operating costs come from fare box and 3.6%comes from subvention.

SIPTU has outlined a number of visions and a charter. I will not go through them in detail but will outline the headings.