Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

It happened after the 2002 general election, in which instance it was severe and lasted for almost two years. This particular outbreak of the same disease may require a period of isolation in a quiet area with no questions asked. The Government backbenchers are not well.

There is a unanimous proclamation of support for public transport. Why, then, is adequate car parking not available at railway stations? If the purpose of the exercise is to reduce the traffic chaos on the roads, why is the alternative not made viable? In my constituency, Maynooth railway station had an average daily throughput of commuters of 5,500 last year but only 160 parking spaces. The train service has since been enhanced and some 7,000 passengers now pass through the station on a daily basis. Why was there no insight in terms of providing adequate parking facilities? Iarnród Éireann previously owned ten acres of land adjacent to the station but they were sold for development purpose. This is typical of the absurd situations that have arisen throughout the State.

There are ten parking spaces at the railway station in Kilcock, which is adjacent to Maynooth and is a smaller town. Anybody from the hinterland attempting to access the rail commuter network must find some way to walk, run or swim to the railway station. The town is completely blocked off, nothing moves and nobody can park anywhere. It is absolute necessity to introduce car parking facilities as an urgent priority.

Several constituents have asked me recently whether it is possible to travel directly from Celbridge, which is on the southern Dublin-Kildare rail route, to Leixlip, which is on the western route. I wrote a long letter of inquiry to Dublin Bus in this regard and received a polite and understanding response which informed me that, unfortunately, there was no proposal to extend a feeder bus service from Celbridge to Leixlip. The letter writer informed me that some 1,800 passengers use Leixlip station per day and that 300 parking places have recently been provided. He also pointed out that there is a bus service that goes to Lucan on one side and to Maynooth on the other and that the people concerned might consider travelling two miles in one direction and then going back the other way. What type of logic is this? A person in a hurry to get to work in the morning will not begin the journey by travelling in the opposite direction for two miles. I have replied to this letter with suggestions as to what might be done.

The development of the transport system and the associated alleviation of traffic chaos must be based on two elements. These are an increase in the frequency of services and an increase in capacity by, for example, providing additional carriages on trains. This proposal is usually met with the response that, for safety purposes, platforms cannot be extended. However, this can be handled by, for example, sealing the doors at both ends. We can no longer afford merely to talk about taking action.

Another issue relates to parking, which I have already mentioned. It is not rocket science to decide whether a feeder bus service will be provided to a car park or train facilities, or whether adequate car parking will be provided. It should be simple to bring about the two options but the awful issue of cost keeps cropping up. If we are serious about doing the job, we surely have to be prepared to spend money.

That is the reason people have been raising questions about whether it is wise to spend money on particular projects. Did we not discuss the Red Cow roundabout for some time, marvelling at the amount of money which could be spent on it, how long it could go on and where it would end? People on the other side of the House then complain that we raise questions about expenditure.

It is a simple matter; a survey is not required to decide whether car parking is provided or, in its absence, a feeder bus service that will deliver people to services. If people are to use a feeder bus service, they should not be brought via 25 sets of traffic lights, in which case they may not use it all.

Some of the speakers last night, including Deputy Kennedy, were very indignant that the Opposition would raise questions about expenditure, more or less wondering what we were worrying about and indicating the Government is in control. Has the Government demonstrated signs of being in control? Did we not see in another element of the transport issue in recent weeks that people with provisional driving licences were all going to be put off the road over one weekend? This happened when one element of Government ran off the road. When the Minister decided in a panic after the weekend to pull the handbrake, he went off in a different direction.

I am unsure what this indicates. There is a more important issue we would do well to remember now. It is not so long ago that the Government assured this House on the privatisation of Aer Lingus and said everything in the garden would be rosy. After we returned from the summer recess, the Heathrow slots from Shannon were gone. Does anybody really expect us to believe anything from the Government any more? The slots disappeared overnight.

We were then told it was the job of the board to ensure the company made a profit. I would have thought it was the job of the board to ensure some kind of service would be provided as well. Profit could have been a factor but not necessarily a priority. If anybody wants to make a profit to that extent, it would be simpler and easier to join a merchant bank.

I am sure the Minister of State will convey these issues to his colleagues, as he is probably as disappointed with them as I am. Unless transport policy and its implementation are more structured, decisive and visionary in future, we will have much hard thinking to do before Transport 21 comes to a halt.

See this speech in context