Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

As I was saying when the debate adjourned last evening, the responsibilities likely to fall on the proposed Dublin transport authority, DTA, are great and I hope they do not conflict with other statutory bodies and authorities. I hope we do not end up with a turf war between the various bodies that deal with local issues such as roads, transport and education, as access and transport with respect to education is very important.

Another issue I meant to deal with last night which will bear a further visit is the question of the Minister's responsibility to the House. I do not agree with the regularly held belief that if the Minister is not directly running the show, he or she has no responsibility to the House. The Minister has responsibility for every penny of the budget coming from his or her Department. The Minister has responsibility for the parties to which this funding goes, as well as an onus to extract from those bodies information raised by Members of the House at any particular time.

The practice has developed over the years where it is very handy for Ministers to opt out and say they are not directly responsible because the area is run by the HSE or some other body; in this case it would be the Dublin transport authority. The Minister appears to have no responsibility. At what stage does responsibility go along with allocation of money? In every other show on Earth, one follows the other automatically. It is not so in this House, and that is for the convenience of Ministers. That is fine when in government but as I have often said in the past, it may be a long time coming but everybody will get a touch of the Opposition, and then it will not be so nice. It will be too late to change the rules at that stage.

We must be absolutely clear in the running of this House. I was delighted last night to see two relevant Ministers come in here to answer matters on the Adjournment. I particularly commend the Taoiseach and Tánaiste for that. For a long time, we in the Opposition have been treated with contempt, with one particular Minister of State coming in to take replies to two, three or four matters on the Adjournment. If those in the House begin to treat it with contempt, the public will eventually conclude we should be treated the same way.

On the transport issue, I have repeatedly put down questions on the convenient locations of bus stops and their safe construction. It is a simple matter that encourages the use of public transport. A stop should be well located and appointed, sheltered and properly maintained. The reply which comes back again and again is that the Minister for Transport has no responsibility to the House, or this is a matter for the Garda. I do not know what the Garda should be doing about the matter except in regard to safety issues. The Minister for Transport should have overall responsibility in this area. Two or three years ago when some of my constituents were tragically killed at a bus stop in the city, who came into the House to explain the matter but the Minister for Transport? He is the Minister with responsibility.

I ask the Minister of State to convey to his colleagues some hint that we might expect a response that deals with the issue. It is helpful to Ministers if this is done in the interests of accountability and transparency, rather than them avoiding responsibilities, ducking, dodging, bobbing and weaving in trying to get away from an issue. The process would be helpful to Ministers and backbenchers on both sides of the House. This would be beneficial to all, and consumers in particular.

When we do not get ministerial responsibility, we must write directly to the body involved. We get a reply or a promise of a reply in an interim or holding letter, which tells us of the great things that will happen and plans in the area. This issue relates to general locations of bus services or stops with Bus Átha Cliath. We are then told the request is technically impossible, unreasonable, unfeasible or cannot be done. In writing again, we would suggest the matter be examined in a certain light. After that a long silence ensues and after a year or so we might get another reply.

If somebody thinks this is funny, he or she should wait to see what the real fun will be. It is not smart at all but a serious deficiency in the system of accountability. The location of bus stops and rail stations have an impact on people's health and safety and the quality of their daily lives. It is the duty of those responsible to reply courteously when asked. There should be no scheming and trying to dodge the subject.

I can foresee all kinds of penalties being piled up to discourage the motorist, that hated creature who approaches the city cautiously and eventually ventures into the city if he or she can get there without being accosted by clampers and various other groups and bodies who have other intentions. In case anybody has failed to recognise it, the motorist contributes more than €5 billion to the Exchequer annually. That is ironic.

Some of us must use our cars every day because it is impossible to get public transport. Sometimes the public transport is not dependable or is unavailable or not available at the required times. This is relevant to the greater Dublin area as covered by this proposal.

It is likely that we will be further hammered in the future. I do not look forward to that, and I do not care what the excuse is. Motorists are currently contributing heavily in terms of the easing of transport. One cannot travel in any direction on a motorway without being hit by a toll. If one is unfortunate enough to be hit once or twice in a day, one could be hit three, four or five times. Industry and businesses are hit regularly. We are paying in that way. We are also paying motor tax, insurance and VRT. I tabled various parliamentary questions to the Minister for Finance which he answered and he accepted responsibility. The total contributed by the unfortunate motorist for daring to come into the capital city is enormous. I would like to believe that the Dublin transport authority will not set out to screw the motorist to the ground in order to make itself appear feasible, acceptable and politically correct.

See this speech in context