Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I wish to share time with Deputies Shane McEntee and Paul Kehoe. As this is my first opportunity to speak in the 30th Dáil, I wish to congratulate the Ceann Comhairle and wish him well and also the Minister on his appointment as Minister for Transport. It is not the first time we have opposed one another as we faced each other in the past on environment matters.

I welcome the Bill as it presages and facilitates the removal of the hated barriers on the M50. These barriers have caused such misery to commuters over the years. They are adding to the delays, congestion and heartache caused both by the upgrade works and by the recent opening of the Dublin Port tunnel in tandem with the works. If this Roads Bill helps get rid of these barriers, then I will certainly welcome it and I want to see it become law quickly.

I support and appreciate the necessity of putting legislation in place to ensure that enforcement proceedings against non-payers of the toll are possible and that follow-up procedures are robust. Barrier-free tolling is an honour system and as with any such system, a failure to pay and to behave honourably must be followed by retribution which must be swift, onerous and without exception. If this is not the case and if immediate and inescapable penalties for non-payment are not applied, then the system as a whole is discredited and universal avoidance of the payment is almost inevitable.

Most people would probably prefer not to pay any tolls but the vast majority are law-abiding and will pay what is required by law. However, it should be noted that they will only pay if the law is applied to everyone and enforcement of the law is applied to every defaulter. It is unfortunate that this will not be the case; the toll will not be paid by any foreign-registered car or truck. Many foreign drivers will not pay even when they are driving Irish-registered cars, simply because it will be impossible to find them. I do not believe I am the only person to have heard anecdotal evidence of widespread fraud with regard to foreign licences, foreign insurance and foreign registration and I am sure the Minister hears it as frequently as I do. Unless the law is applied universally and the toll paid by everybody, it will become a cause of significant resentment and ultimately will lead to widespread resistance to payment.

It is grossly unfair that Irish hauliers who are already paying road tax in Ireland will also pay this toll while their European counterparts who pay no road tax will not be required to pay the toll. It is inevitable that this inequity will have a distorting effect on the structure of the industry. In the long term, it is difficult to presume there will be any Irish-registered trucks if payment of tolls can be avoided by hauliers who use toll roads on a regular basis. Tolls make up a considerable part of a haulier's costs and there will be a real incentive to register trucks outside the country.

Non-Irish people make up 10% of the population. Foreign licences are outside the scope of the penalty points system and these licence-holders are not accruing penalty points. This cannot be allowed to continue. For any law to be credible, it must be applied 100% and not 90% or 80%. The Minister's predecessor maintained it was impossible to bring all residents within the system because there was no access to the driver files of other EU countries. I accept that failure to get access to the driver files of other states makes the situation more difficult but it is not insurmountable and if the will was there, it could be done.

Other countries have access to Irish driver files. I refer to Irish residents who fail to pay the London congestion charge and find a bill waiting for them when they return to Ireland. The German roads authority charges every German haulier a fee per kilometre for road usage and this is administered and monitored through a comprehensive camera system. The charge is unerringly accurate and absolutely inescapable. Britain is introducing legislation to ensure total compliance with and enforcement of penalty points and congestion tolls which will be operated by means of the camera system. The British police are to be given powers to collect on-the-spot fines or to confiscate the vehicle. This is what is needed in this jurisdiction and if the Irish licensing and driver file systems are not sufficient, then the Garda Síochána and a camera system must be used.

Significant sums of taxpayers' money are being paid to introduce barrier-free tolling. The cost of the administrative and surveillance system and the annual operating costs will be substantial. However, the system will only apply to approximately 90% of the population and this is not good enough.

The provision of a country-wide camera surveillance system has recently been put to tender. This will be effectively an electronic policing system but its potential is not being maximised as it will only police the offence of speeding. It must be used to at least allow gardaí pursue persistent offenders such as those who persistently fail to pay tolls.

The Minister in his contribution was at pains to emphasise the sophistication of the barrier-free tolling mechanism and the administrative and back-up system. However, it only monitors some of the traffic. This is regrettable when the technology exists to ensure 100% compliance. Fine Gael supports barrier-free tolling and it cannot happen quick enough on the M50, in my view. Fine Gael wishes to facilitate the legislation but we should ensure that it will provide the right solution.

The Minister acknowledged that people would love to see the barriers disappear. People cannot understand the reason the barriers on the M50 are not raised when congestion is at its worst. There is now a contract agreed for the buying-back of the concession from National Toll Roads and this contract will be completed next year. The public cannot understand why occasional relief cannot be given when congestion is at its worst and during the ongoing upgrade works. There have been several instances of appalling congestion on the M50. The smallest thing can throw the entire commuter belt into chaos; a traffic cone falls over and is moved at the inappropriate moment and this causes back-ups which last for hours. It makes sense at times like this to do everything possible to make life a little easier and less miserable for people who have to use the M50.

I do not believe Ministers have any real concept of what it is like to have to commute on the M50 every day, twice a day. Hearing reports on AA Roadwatch is different from having to experience such delays twice a day. The impact is felt beyond the M50 because as a result of the congestion on the M50, the upgrade works and the trucks arriving from the tunnel, the number of vehicles using the M50 has dropped by approximately 15,000. Those vehicles are still making journeys every day but they are now using local roads in the vicinity of the M50 and this is adding to congestion and making life miserable for people living in that commuter belt.

The taxpayer, the motorist and the public at large are all of the view that the toll arrangements on the M50 — which took 20 years to complete — and the WestLink were a rotten deal in every sense and continue to be so. It is time to give the taxpayers and the motorists a break and to show a little sensitivity. The world would not come to an end if the barriers were occasionally raised to clear the worst of the queues. I appreciate the lifting of the barriers will not solve the general congestion problem on the M50 but it would make some difference at some times of the day and would indicate an appreciation of what commuters must endure every day.

The previous Minister introduced this Bill in the Seanad and he stated that from 2008 when barrier-free tolling is to be introduced, the National Roads Authority would be in a position to manage and address congestion difficulties on the M50. He stated that it will allow systems to be put in place on roads such as the M50 to relieve congestion and improve quality of life. I may be a little over-suspicious but I am not sure what this means. The passive, single-point toll which we were promised and which the Minister has referred to in his contribution is not consistent with the language being used here of "active management". I would like to know the exact meaning. Is it merely the ability to vary the toll? If so, what are the parameters of the variation in the toll? Can we be assured that the cost will not be such that local roads will become the relief roads?

Can the single-point toll that the Minister has again promised us this morning be levied at any point along the route? Will it definitely be at a single point? What is meant precisely when the Minister refers to "systems to manage congestion"? What is the act of management to which he refers? Is he happy to hand over powers to vary or manage tolls on the M50 to a body not accountable to the Dáil?

Regarding the other provisions, I fully support the designation of high-quality dual carriageways as motorways. I understand that the thinking behind the proposal is to accord protection against overdevelopment. It is a good idea to protect the public investment in such roads. My only reservation is in respect of the differences in compensation paid for land purchased for dual carriageways and motorways. In the case of the latter, I presume that the development controls and limits are quite clear and that the compensation reflects that. If we designate dual carriageways as motorways retrospectively, might that imply constitutional challenges, given our predilection thereto in this country? I presume that this has been thought about, but perhaps the Minister might set my mind at rest.

I welcome the long-overdue introduction of service areas on motorways, something essential for hauliers in particular. For everyone, especially those travelling with children, it is very important that there be a safe place to pull over. For hauliers making long-distance journeys, it is an absolutely essential road safety measure. The Minister will be aware that the sea journey to Europe renders compliance with EU regulations quite onerous for Irish hauliers. Nevertheless, it is essential that they do so, something possible only if the facilities are there. I understand that the market did not respond to invitations to provide such facilities, and it is right that the NRA do so now. I presume that it will franchise out their operation.

Deputy Shortall and I, over many years, have sought by-laws to deal with parking arrangements on days when major events take place. That measure is also very welcome.

In the few minutes left, I will refer to an issue in the Bill that I have undertaken to raise at every opportunity. There is an ongoing trend on the part of all Ministers to divest themselves of almost all their responsibilities, instead delegating them to unaccountable bodies. This Bill will pass further powers to the NRA and the Commission for Taxi Regulation that formerly lay with the Minister, in which regard he was accountable to the Dáil.

I have the greatest respect for the NRA, which does a great job, and the Commission for Taxi Regulation has also done well since its establishment. This is in no way a criticism of them. However, transferring administrative tasks from a Department to an agency should not absolve the Minister of overall responsibility and the need to be accountable to the Dáil. Ministers have adopted an unnecessary Pontius Pilate attitude to avoid being accountable to the Dáil or even furnishing answers to it on issues to do with policy rather than administration. That trend is not good for our democracy and not in the public interest. When it is accompanied by a further trend to make significant announcements outside the Chamber, our Parliament is left with very little relevance.

The Minister may be aware that, when launching her recent report, the Ombudsman mentioned the 450 single-purpose bodies set up in recent years to fulfil functions formerly covered by the Government. She was obviously complaining that such agencies did not come under the remit of the Freedom of Information Act 1997 or her office. She referred to the very point that I make today, and which the Minister will have heard made by many other Deputies:

Other accountability mechanisms are also lacking in that they are subject to little or no parliamentary oversight and there has been a diminution in Ministerial responsibility and control over functions which formerly were part of the relevant department. The need for legislation to correct this accountability deficit and to allow users of the services of these public bodies to complain to the Ombudsman is long overdue.

In the Department of Transport and the Marine, there are the NRA, the RPA, the DAA, the RSA, the Commission for Taxi Regulation, all the CIE bodies, the Irish Aviation Authority and many more that do not occur to me at present. One wonders what the Department and the Minister do if they are not responsible or accountable for any of those agencies. Specifically, the Minister is not even willing to answer questions on them. I know that in recent years his predecessor, as my colleague will bear out, rejected more parliamentary questions than he answered. That practice has definitely got worse over the course of my time in the Dáil. If there is no accountability at the top, how can we expect civil servants and employees in agencies delivering public services to be accountable and transparent, feeling that the public deserve the best? I hope that, during his tenure at the Department of Transport and the Marine, the current Minister will at least answer questions on issues of policy.

See this speech in context