Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)

The Taoiseach has given a long reply. It is generally recognised that the social partnership has been beneficial for the country because it has dampened the need for strike action in many cases. The structure originally envisaged, however, is not able to cope with what we face now.

Chaos is being caused by the Dublin Bus strike in what is a growing city with an increasing population, where commuters are hard-pressed to get to work in our high pressure society. They need new cross-city and orbital bus routes and services. When the system fails to find agreement with its workforce causing chaos on the streets it significantly disrupts people's lives. Does the Taoiseach accept that the Dublin Bus dispute, leaving aside its minutiae, is the failure of a regulatory regime to provide for people's need for services given the physical and human expansion of this city? Leaving aside the minutiae of the dispute does the Taoiseach agree that we are faced with a symptom of a failed regulatory regime? Will the Taoiseach comment on that?

People who require transport services generally do not mind who provides them as long as they are cost efficient, safe, effective and get them to and from work without disruption. Does the Taoiseach agree that the liberalisation of transport in Dublin and across the country has failed in this regard? Deputy Mary O'Rourke, who was Minister in 2000, introduced proposals for the liberalisation of these routes that were abandoned just before the election. There is clearly a demand from many people for new services and this disruption has occurred because the virtual monopoly that is in situ has failed to find agreement in its workforce.

Is this matter the symptom of a failed regulatory regime? What does the Taoiseach propose regarding the continued liberalisation of the bus transport market? It takes three years for a private sector applicant to get a licence, given the chaos in the Department of Transport.

See this speech in context