Dáil debates
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Report Stage
1:00 pm
Peter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
We fundamentally disagree with the Fine Gael position. The Deputy says this is a charter for no change. It is a fundamental change in our bus licensing legislation from the 1932 Act and the Transport Act 1958 to deal with the circumstances that suit Ireland. We disagree on one basic fact, namely, if we were to accept the Fine Gael proposal, the obligation would be on the national transport authority to invite tenders in this regard. We want competition but we want bus service operators to request licences for particular routes. We disagree with Fine Gael in that we believe the ultimate consequence of what it is proposing is that vast parts of this city and country would be without bus services. That is the factual position.
I wish to address Deputy Broughan's points on section 18. The Minister undertook to look again at this proposed amendment in the context of the possibility that a market could develop for bus licence transfers in the same manner as that experienced in respect of taxi licences before the market was liberalised. Taxi licences developed a value for two linked reasons. The first was the almost total lack of growth in the number of new taxis after 1978 in virtually all areas. The second was the expectation that there would be no future growth, which resulted from decisions made annually by the elected members of the relevant local authorities. Those market conditions are totally lacking in the context of the licensing regime that currently applies in respect of the commercial public bus services or the proposed regime under this legislation. The overall licensing system envisaged under this Bill will offer a far more robust approach to competition in that there is a far greater emphasis on the need to meet the demand of consumers. Therefore, there is no basis for any expectation that the licence will give some form of exclusive protection from competition to its holder. It is the absence of that expectation that will render moot any potential for profiteering through the sale of licences.
The Minister considered strongly the points made by Deputy Broughan but because of the considerations I have just set out, he asks the Deputy to withdraw the amendment.
No comments