Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on this important issue which affects our daily lives. Some of us have been around long enough to see how time has passed and the changes that have taken place. I attended a public meeting several years ago at which a proposal was put from the floor on using the railway line and the canal for road transport. Thankfully, the proposal was never proceeded with and the canal is now being used for leisure and amenity purposes. In addition, the rail system that runs through the town in which I live, Maynooth, and various other places is being utilised in a way in which it was never previously used.

When we set about trying to achieve that to which I refer, every conceivable obstacle was placed in our path. I include in this the suggestion that the railway line be concreted over and used for road transport. It was first put to us that it would not be possible to run extra trains because the tracks were of the wrong type or were too narrow or because there was only a single line. We were informed it would not be possible to do anything and that even if it were possible, people would not use the service. We argued that if the service was provided, people would use it. We also stated cognisance should be taken of the needs of the commuter as opposed to what was convenient for those responsible for drawing up timetables.

With the passage of time, things have changed and it is now proposed to consider how best to meet the needs of commuters. That is a good development. I congratulate Iarnród Éireann, Bus Átha Cliath and all those involved in the provision of public transport for addressing issues such as those to which I refer.

We are attending at the birth of another authority and it will be interesting to see what happens. If it is to be effective, the authority will have to be powerful and there is no doubt it will clash with other agencies of the State. The NRA and HSE do so on a regular basis. It will not always be the case that the new authority will be correct either.

Deputy O'Connor stated that public representatives will have an influence on the new authority. I do not know how much influence they will have on it. However, it is important to take account of the views of members of the public as expressed through their elected representatives. This is not only good for such representatives, it is also good for democracy. The latter is going out the window at a rapid rate, particularly at local level. I refer in this regard to the activities of the NRA and certain local authorities, which seem to make decisions solely on the basis of technical information and regardless of what anyone else might have to say.

The DTA will have an influence on the counties — Meath, Wicklow and Kildare — adjacent to Dublin and I hope this influence will be positive. I also hope the DTA will recognise the needs of particular areas. I recall it being stated some years ago that if traffic on the M50 moved any faster, it would lead to the creation of a traffic jam. That statement was utter rubbish. It was also stated that such a traffic jam would cause delays of up to two hours. I recall similar statements being made in respect of certain stretches of the M50, particularly those at Palmerstown and the Red Cow roundabout.

Can someone indicate whether it will be possible to carry out some serious advance planning? Will it be possible to employ an expert with knowledge of public transport and transportation in general? Will advice be taken from such an individual? Would it be possible to encourage him or her to visit some of the cities or towns throughout Europe which have solved their traffic problems and in which the authorities are able to convey many more people to and from work etc. than we do by way of a combination of public and private transport?

Whenever any of us poor, unfortunate fools who are elected by the public raise questions we are told we do not really understand these matters and that they are extremely technical in nature. Good reasons have always been given as to why we might not understand such matters and we came to the conclusion that we could not understand them. However, it transpires that simple remedies will provide all the answers. I cannot understand why we must spend so long beating down the door before the message gets through to those for whom it was originally intended.

The Dublin transport authority will be another large body. It will be powerful. As we move towards a situation where there will be a directly elected Lord Mayor of Dublin, the interaction between his or her office and the DTA, particularly in the context of the need for investment in infrastructure, will prove extremely interesting.

One of the aspects which must be borne in mind with regard to the capital and its environs is how to convey commuters quickly, safely, efficiently and effectively from locations outside the city to its centre and vice versa. We are failing in respect of this matter at present and I do not know whether the Dublin transport authority will be able to do much about it. We always seem to introduce stop-gap measures to solve serious problems. There are countless instances where this has been done in the past five or ten years.

In the 1950s, the Naas dual carriageway was designed and built by people who were much less sophisticated than ourselves. Engineers employed by the local authority were responsible for its construction. The carriageway lasted from the 1950s to the 1980s and managed to accommodate traffic volumes in a way no major road development since has done. No sooner was the famous M50 built than it was out of date. No sooner was the upgraded road running from Lucan into the city opened than it was out of date. When these projects were proceeding, questions should have been asked as to whether it would have been possible to put in place additional lanes or separate roads in order that vehicles would not all converge on the one spot. I cannot understand why no one ever thought to ask these questions.

There are economies of scale and one can save money in the short term. However, in the long term the story will be different. There is a proposal to upgrade a road in my constituency that runs from Enfield to Edenderry. This issue is giving rise to great emotion among members of the local community. By the time the project is complete, the road will be out of date and will be incapable of accommodating the volume of traffic that will use it. Anyone who wishes to monitor the position in respect of this road may do so and may return in five or six years to inform me that I was right. I have no doubt this project is an absolute waste of money. In addition, a different type of road structure should have been put in place.

I understand a report was jointly published in the past couple of days by the Minister for Transport and his counterpart in Northern Ireland. The report indicates a prescribed minimum height for trucks using tunnels and this is higher than the roof of the famous port tunnel. How is it intended that traffic from the remainder of the country heading towards Dublin Port will negotiate the tunnel? There are few options. Either the floor of the tunnel can be lowered or the air can be let out of the tyres on larger vehicles in the hope that they might be able to pass through. It is daft that this transport report, which was drawn up by the two Administrations on this island, has reached a conclusion regarding the minimum height for trucks using tunnels and that our most modern tunnel cannot accommodate these vehicles. There will be a need for much more detailed reflection and debate on this matter in the future.

I wish to refer to the modern trend in planning to house the maximum number of people in as close proximity as possible to public transport. That is a good idea. However, it does not necessarily mean that people's houses should be built on top of railway tracks. People will have a reasonable quality of life if their houses are situated within walking distance of their local railway stations. They should be able to walk there and back without difficulty.

See this speech in context