Dáil debates
Thursday, 12 June 2014
Topical Issue Debate
National Road Network Service Areas
5:10 pm
Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source
I thank the Minister, Deputy Leo Varadkar, for coming to the House to address this important issue. I raise it today because, as the Minister will be aware, the NRA has issued a draft policy on service areas on the national road network. The draft policy is to be subject to public consultation until 23 June. I am concerned about it on a number of levels. When one reads it, one realises that the NRA references the trans-European network transport, TEN-T, policy as its basis for having to bring about change. The TEN-T policy has divided Europe's road network into two: the core network, which in Ireland comprises the M1, M7 and M8, and the comprehensive network, which in Ireland comprises the other motorways and dual carriageways, including the M9 and M11. It seems to be unduly hasty on the part of the NRA to be implementing the TEN-T policy given that the deadline for the development of service areas on the core network is 2030 and for the development of service areas on the comprehensive network is 2050.
The M9 goes through my local community. I know all too well from travelling up to and down from Dublin the need for online service areas. I am very much in favour of them but I do not believe the State should necessarily be building them without giving the private sector an opportunity to do so in the first instance. A striking feature of the NRA's policy is that there is no reference to privately developed projects. I believe these have been very successful. The State-led approach ignores the potential of existing facilities. It does not refer to specific private enterprises, such as Junction 14 in Monasterevin, of which I am very aware. A new one, known as the Barack Obama Plaza, is being developed outside Moneygall. This was developed at a cost of €7 million by a private investor. It will create in excess of 60 jobs overall. While expansion may be required in Tipperary to facilitate HGVs, the Junction 14 project meets all the necessary requirements regarding parking facilities etc.
In the draft policy, the NRA states there is a high level of public satisfaction with the existing NRA service areas. This is based on a customer survey. The service areas in question are in Lusk, Castlebellingham and Enfield. Did the NRA ever carry out a survey of Junction 14 in Monasterevin? If footfall is anything to go by, the customers are satisfied. I would imagine that those customers, who are taxpayers, would be happy to know hard-earned taxpayers' money was not used to build the facility.
I am concerned that the NRA seems to be going into competition with the private sector. We lack an holistic approach whereby the NRA, in conjunction with the local authorities, would have very much fixed criteria on how a private sector developer could develop online service facilities. The NRA’s document sets out where it would like them to be and where they need to be. It refers to a distance of 100 km, as in the TEN-T policy, and the requirement for drivers to take a break after having driven for four hours and 15 min, at a maximum. There are very few journeys in Ireland that would take longer than that. One would travel from one coast to the other. We are not comparing like with like. This is not Germany or Italy, which have large autobahns on which one could drive for days on end.
We need to develop an holistic approach whereby the NRA could work with the local authority and allow the private sector to develop the service areas in the first instance. Failing that, we have until 2030 to develop them. We would like to see them in place much earlier. If the private sector is given a clear, coherent way of going forward, it can do what is desired. Failing this, the State should intervene and develop service areas where the commercial sector has not recognised sufficient demand but where they are necessary from a road safety perspective. I am very concerned that we are investing taxpayers’ money in the development of service areas without affording an opportunity to the private sector to develop them first. Obviously, if the money were not used on public private partnerships, it could be used by the Minister for further road maintenance works, repairs and road development and construction.
No comments