Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)

I compliment my colleague, Deputy Olivia Mitchell, the Labour Party and the Green Party for tabling the motion. We are all aware of the need to reach our emissions targets under Kyoto but Ireland has one of the highest emissions rates per head of population in the world, a huge portion of which has come from transport in recent years. The Government, in its own emissions trading report last March, predicted an increase in emissions of 2% arising from transport but the EPA states it is closer to 8%.

It is disappointing that there is not one reference in the Government amendment to rail freight. The Minister and all his colleagues have given plenty of excuses why we should not support the rail freight sector. The solution does not involve withdrawing investment from the road network — we need that investment and it must continue. It requires investment in other forms of transport, especially rail freight, in tandem with investing in the roads network.

The current roads programme does not provide the investment urgently required for our national secondary roads. A huge amount of tonnage is transported across the country on substandard national secondary roads. We transport cement, which was taken off the rail network, as was the Guinness contract. Even timber from the west of Ireland travels to Waterford entirely on national secondary roads but there is no investment in that road network at present.

Coillte now brings timber from Scotland into the Minister's own constituency in Waterford because it is cheaper to transport it from Scotland to Waterford than to bring it from the west of Ireland. There is something seriously wrong if it is preferable to do that than support our own growers. The issue needs to be addressed and cannot be ignored.

In 2004, there were 1,380 accidents involving heavy goods vehicles leading to the deaths of 74 people, 23 of whom were pedestrians. I suggested to the Minister's predecessor and the Department a change in regulations to oblige lorries to use a simple spray suppression system, so that when travelling behind a heavy goods vehicle on wet roads a driver did not see a fog of spray. It is a pleasure to drive behind any of the continental lorries on our roads but domestic lorries would not be let through Dublin Port, never mind into Calais, because they do not have those systems. They are required for goods vehicles travelling on the Continent but not for those on our own roads. One regulation would change that.

In the UK the benefits of rail freight are assessed on the basis of the environmental impact of moving freight off the roads network. The first consideration is emissions, the second the cost savings on road maintenance, the third congestion relief and the fourth environmental and safety benefits for other road users. A similar assessment should be made in this country because, taking the wider economic implications into account, a financial case can be made for rail freight in a number of situations, even in a country as small as this.

My colleagues have raised the issue of rail lines. The Athlone-Mullingar rail line is being used as a political football and we need clarity as to whether the required investment will be made. There is great potential to develop capacity from the west of Ireland because, as the Minister is aware, there is a limit between Athlone and Portarlington.

See this speech in context