Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)

We will not allow the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, to set up another quango that is not accountable to the Oireachtas. All Members are aware of the problems with the HSE. As I said, a positive provision in terms of accountability would be to make the lord mayor the chairperson of the Dublin transport authority. A stipulation that the advisory committee must include local authority members would also be welcome.

Accountability to the Dáil is another aspect of the accountability requirement. Day after day, parliamentary questions are tabled to the Minister for Transport on the activities of Iarnród Éireann, Bus Éireann and so on. We receive some degree of accountability in the House in this regard. I am concerned that the Bill's provisions may erode even this level of accountability and we will be in a position where we are constantly receiving letters from the Ceann Comhairle's office telling us that we cannot raise such issues in the Chamber because they are not a matter for the Dáil. We must be able to discuss the activities of the Dublin transport authority in this House by way of parliamentary questions or Adjournment debate. That will be critical to the success of the authority. We will not support a HSE-type body in the area of transport.

The question of membership of the board is not adequately dealt with in the legislation. There should be a process by which commuters, who represent neither trade unions, business nor politics but rather the users of the system, are consulted. Representatives of commuter groups should be included on the board so that the voice of the consumer is heard clearly. Such an approach may lead to a sharper focus on the part of the chief executive officer of the board. As well as the input of vested interests — I do not use that term negatively but rather in reference to the business community, trade unions, transport companies and so on — the chief executive officer should be able to avail of the insight provided by those who use the system. Commuter groups must have access to the highest level of the decision-making process. As I said, we must avoid at all costs the creation of another body in the mode of the HSE. We do not want a board whose members we cannot speak to, seek to influence or question. As it stands, however, this Bill will lead to just such a scenario.

One of the key difficulties with the Bill is that it is not all-encompassing. The Minister originally proposed to incorporate the Railway Procurement Agency, RPA, within the new transport authority. After thinking about it for a year, however, he has changed his mind. We will now have two bodies with the same powers, the RPA and the Dublin transport authority. I intend to table an amendment on Committee Stage proposing that the RPA be absorbed into the Dublin transport authority. I do not accept the reasons offered by the Minister of State that this should not happen.

There must be a single organisation with a single voice. The RPA has been in disagreement with Iarnród Éireann for some time in regard to the Broadstone debacle, which Senator Paschal Donohoe brought to our attention. He is an active Senator in this area and will be a successful Deputy in the future. The dispute between the RPA and Iarnród Éireann might have led to land being cut off and communities being denied the transport corridor they needed. The situation was ultimately resolved but it is important that a similar dispute does not recur. I acknowledge and respect the tremendous professional commitment demonstrated by the RPA. However, it must not continue as an entity operating separately from the Dublin transport authority but should instead be absorbed into it. There can be no more turf wars. The way to prevent them is to ensure there is no other entity with many of the same powers as the Dublin transport authority.

The new broadcasting Bill will include a provision to oblige members of the RTE authority to come before the Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. The Minister has taken upon himself the power to appoint whoever he wishes to the board of the Dublin transport authority. In the interests of transparency and accountability, the Oireachtas Committee on Transport should have the power to grill the Minister's appointees as to their experience and suitability. Moreover, the committee should be allowed to declare an appointee unsuitable. We will make clear to the Minister that we will not accept appointees who are merely party political hacks, regardless of which party that is. We want people who know the business and who live, work or travel in Dublin. If there is accountability before the Oireachtas committee, as is proposed in regard to the broadcasting Bill 2008, the Bill will be stronger and more effective and will lead to greater accountability and better performance. We need to improve the transport system in a transparent manner in terms of having the power to question decisions rather than change them. People on the board should be able to challenge decisions as they arise from the point of view of system users. The DTA should be responsible to the Members of this House. It should not just be a matter of its chairman appearing for 90 minutes before a committee once per year to discuss annual accounts. That is the amount of time we give to the NRA and other bodies because it is all that is available through the committee system. We want more accountability so that we can deal with controversies and get answers from the Minister. We want to hold debates on the Adjournment and raise issues on Leaders' Questions.

Transport users will not have choices until the metro is constructed. Not every bus user is a commuter because a significant number of travellers, such as older people and students, are not going to work. New areas in Dublin city and surrounding counties lack proper public transport services. We want to see more buses, greater choice for transport users and stronger competition in the bus market. That is a cumbersome procedure under the Road Transport Act 1932, and it needs to be urgently reformed. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, has said he will not introduce competition into the bus market before next year at the earliest but we will propose amendments on Committee Stage to open the market in Dublin to competition. That was Government policy. When Deputy Brennan was Minister for Transport, 25% of the market was to be opened, a figure which was reduced to 15% under the subsequent Minister, Deputy Cullen. The present Minister was reported in The Sunday Business Post as stating there would not be competition but he has since advised us not to believe what we read in the newspapers. He may be about to make some sort of commitment but that is not good enough. This Bill presents an excellent opportunity to increase competition. It is not just a matter of competition, however, because we need to provide choice in terms of more buses on more routes.

We cannot leave the matter to Dublin Bus. I am not here to criticise the company or its workforce but restrictive practices have existed in the past and issues arise in respect of public service obligations. We will have greater transparency from Dublin Bus and better services if the consumer has more choice. We are not calling for competition between service providers on existing routes, however, because we recommend competitive tendering, with franchises for one year or longer. Clearly, it costs a lot of money to purchase a bus so we do not expect to restrict the franchise to one year. The Minister for Transport proposes that the routes given to Dublin Bus will remain with the company for five years, which seems a long time. That is not a competitive way to approach the matter. We would like this Bill to reform the 1932 Act and we will propose amendments that turn the DTA into a one stop shop to consider and control these factors. We do not want closed shops, routes that do not expand or communities without transport. I do not care what colour the bus may be, as long as it provides a choice to consumers. Competitive tendering will make an impact in that respect. The Progressive Democrat Party is in favour of bus competition and the Green Party recommends reform of the 1932 Act in the policy paper it published yesterday, which means every party but Fianna Fáil wants to introduce reforms. We are advocating the inclusion of reform in this Bill.

The operation of the Freedom of Information Act is important. Freedom of information is a critical legislative power allowing John citizen to find out what is going on. By selectively watering down the legislation, this Government has made it increasingly difficult for Opposition Members to find out what Ministers are up to. The freedom of information requirements under this Bill appear to allow the transport provider to decide what it shall call restricted information, thereby giving it more power than it is entitled to. It is not that we are going to seek sensitive commercial information but we want to know what is going on and the nature of the choices we face. Freedom of information regulations can be used by citizens and journalists in that regard. I would like the Bill to be as open as possible and apply freedom of information to areas such as public service obligation routes and the truth about what is happening in Dublin Bus. We cannot find this information at present. I do not imply, however, that Dublin Bus has not been open to meetings or exchanges of information.

The need has arisen for a national transport authority. Issues that arise in Dublin which apply nationwide will not be addressed unless the powers of the DTA are extended to a national transport authority.

There are positive elements in this Bill and we have consistently called for legislation to be introduced in this area. Legislation we previously introduced in the House to provide for a Dublin transport authority was rejected by Fianna Fáil.

This Bill's strength lies in its provisions on planning and development. It is right and proper that corruption will no longer exist in local government. We will have no further Mahon tribunals for this region if every planning decision, development plan and rezoning is subject to the DTA approval in respect of infrastructure. Regardless of who the councillors are or which authority they represent, they will have to provide sustainable planning and development. That is a critical part of this Bill and it is a measure which I strongly support. However, these issues extend beyond Dublin. I have read in newspapers about issues pertaining to Killarney and elsewhere in the country. Many towns and villages have been affected by urban sprawl because of bad planning decisions. I welcome the requirement that An Bord Pleanála must have due regard for the views of the DTA when it makes decisions in this area. However, the Minister is losing a golden opportunity by not extending that power to other local authorities. This is an important power and it will make a massive difference to communities.

There is a weakness in the Bill in respect of the constituency I represent. Provision is made in the Bill in respect of the counties immediately adjacent to Dublin. I refer here to Meath, Kildare and Wicklow. In the Seanad, the Labour Party tabled an amendment, with which I agree, to the effect that the Drogheda Borough Council area should be included under the Bill. There is a provision in the Bill under which the Minister can extend the remit of the DTA if it so recommends. However, that is not good enough.

Like east Meath, south Louth is becoming a concrete jungle. If one were to examine the demography and development patterns of east Meath, for which the Bill makes provision, and south Louth, for which it does not, one would see that the two areas are beset by the same problems. There are massive housing estates and a lack of transport infrastructure in both areas. The residents are confused and angry, particularly on foot of the fact that there is an insufficient number of schools, etc., in their areas. The Minister and his officials should consider extending the remit of the DTA to cover south Louth.

My final point relates to the need for transparency in respect of rail fares. I welcome the fact that the DTA will have the power to fix the fares that will be charged by Iarnród Éireann in particular. People are being ripped off in respect of such fares. People from Balbriggan travelling by train from Dublin pay half the fare paid by their fellow passengers who live in Drogheda and Dundalk. The system of fares is inequitable. When one passes Balbriggan, one is obliged to pay an entirely different fare. People are being ripped off left, right and centre by Iarnród Éireann. This is a major issue. The power granted to the DTA in respect of fixing fares may end this great rip off on the part of Iarnród Éireann. I will return to this matter on Committee Stage.

There are many good elements in the Bill. However, without accountability, transparency and openness, we will vote against it because we will not support the creation of another HSE for bureaucrats.

See this speech in context