Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

I am pleased to contribute to the debate on behalf of the Green Party. This is one area in which the three main Opposition parties, who jointly tabled the motion, would make significant changes in the way the country is run. The motion also highlights the paucity of Government thinking on tackling one of the most important issues globally, namely, climate change. The motion refers to a rational approach to transport policy. Unfortunately, standing in its away is a Cabinet member who has shown no sanity or rationality when it comes to transport policy and it is unfortunate that he is not present to contribute to the debate. I hope he takes an opportunity to answer a number of the charges we will make against him.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has made a hollow boast that the very least the Government has managed to achieve is to decouple economic growth from increases in carbon emissions. Such decoupling has been achieved everywhere else in the world. However, this is an even more hollow boast when one considers that road freight over the same period has increased at a faster rate than economic growth. The other side of that equation is that rail freight has decreased accordingly because of the lack of effective Government policy in this area. Road freight accounts for 96% of all freight transported and that percentage is increasing while the European average is 77%. Ireland once had the most extensive rail network in the world. The bones of such a system remain should the political will exist to invest in rail infrastructure on a par with investment in roads. However, last year the Government spent six times as much on roads than on public transport and, as a result, we are lagging behind in what can be achieved.

Other elements of policy need to be put in place. Ports such as Rosslare, Waterford, Foynes and Cork should be used more because they have rail links, which could be connected to the national system, thereby providing for more freight to be carried. The State should move away from a radial rail system, which comprises only lines in and out of Dublin, and restore the remnants of the rail system, which covered all points north, south, east and west. For example, the rail corridor between Cork and Limerick is still in place. It passes through Patrickswell into Limerick city and would obviate the need to travel through Limerick Junction. The western rail corridor could be opened sooner and could be extended further than the Government proposes. Last weekend I read a book on the Letterkenny to Burtonport railway line, which was still in operation in 1935 when my father was a young man. These decisions had a negative effect on the promotion of our rail infrastructure.

Sinister decisions relating to rail freight have been made in recent years. For example, in my constituency, the freight hub in Cork depends on the Norsk facility, which has been put up for sale. In recent years, the rail turntable, which allowed freight trains to change direction, because Cork is a terminus, was dismantled. This was an attempt to disentangle the rail freight infrastructure. Previous speakers are correct that incentives must be provided to achieve a balance between road and rail freight. Under the current system, however, significant subsidies are provided for road freight. The motor tax paid by commercial vehicles on the basis of road space used, the weight of vehicles and the consequent damage done to the road surface is out of proportion with the tax paid by private car users. As the playing pitch in this regard is not level, commercial road freight is subsidised significantly. If the same principle were applied to rail freight, I would be confident that we could begin to turn the current statistics around.

The Minister for Transport has stated he has been informed by Irish Rail about difficulties in expanding rail freight. When I was first elected as a councillor in Cork city in the early 1990s, I asked the manager of Kent Station in Cork about the future of the Cobh suburban line, which was under threat. Thankfully, that is no longer the case. The attitude of the manager, who has since moved on, was that the Cobh line was not worth preserving and when I pointed out that the town had a similar population to Mallow, which is on the Cork to Dublin line, it was news to him. That reflected an attitude that not only existed in Irish Rail but also in the Department of Transport. As a result of biases in perceptions, which are not backed up by statistics or potential, policy decisions have been made that rail freight should go the same way as the rail network in the 19th century. This is not a smokestack industry, as it offers future potential and hope to deal with problems that we have yet to grapple with as a society and on a global level. Rail freight deserves more than the indifference the Government and the Minister are showing towards it.

If rail freight is incentivised effectively, it has the potential to create significant employment growth. Its environmental potential would also be unleashed if we managed to reverse the imbalance between road and rail freight in Ireland. I have run out of hope for the Government in the remaining weeks of this Dáil and, therefore, the next Government should at the very least seek to achieve the same balance between road and rail freight as other European countries, which is 77% by road and 23% by rail. A timeframe of ten years should be set down to achieve that. It will mean investment and a reversal of policy but, in the long run, the country can achieve something it used to when it had the largest network in the world. Until we start believing that and putting such policies in place, rail freight will become a footnote in history. That is not something my party is prepared to allow happen in Government following the next election. Given the track record — to use the pun — of the Government, I cannot see it giving solace in achieving these policy goals.

See this speech in context