Dessie Ellis (Dublin North West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

This is a fairly technical Bill which deals with a number of issues relating to public transport which are important and not very controversial. A number of sections deal with different aspects of transport such as safety, fines and accidents. However some very controversial issues arise in any more general discussion of public transport. At present, the public transport services owned by the State are CIE, Bus Éireann, Dublin Bus and Iarnród Éireann. These companies have struggled through and survived the worst of the economic downturn but they now face many new challenges. Some of these challenges are positive. For instance, it is important that public transport companies are challenged by their service-users to become more accessible, more intuitive and reliable, through the use of innovation and technology. Despite a slow lead-in, in the past few years these companies have embraced the use of technology to make their services better. Very few Dubliners under a certain age do not have the Dublin Bus app on their telephone or a Leap card in their wallet. Most people have also used online features provided by Bus Éireann and Irish Rail. The one failing is in the integrated information apps developed by Transport for Ireland which feel like something created by someone who has never actually had to depend on public transport in Ireland. Most people I have spoken to regarding these integrated apps have said they are not worth attempting to use. Bizarrely, there are two apps provided by Transport for Ireland rather than one integrated app combining real-time information with journey planning.

Some other challenges, such as high fuel costs, are being tackled to a degree by use of other fuel sources and technological innovations in vehicles but more could be done. Public transport could be given a proper fuel rebate, for instance. However, the major challenge is the Government’s attacks on the pillars of Irish public transport. Since coming into office the State subsidy for public transport, which was already far too low compared to other European states, has been cut by over 20%. Rubbing salt into this wound the Government has aggressively sought to undermine public transport companies by ignoring the concerns of workers and putting in motion a privatisation plan which will act as the thin end of the wedge.

Fine Gael and Labour have now driven through their privatisation agenda by planning the tendering to private companies of 10% of public bus routes and 100% of Bus Éireann routes in Waterford. This will not happen for a while but already it is has damaged public transport provision. Earlier this year, Bus Éireann began the process of removing some routes which received no subsidy from the State but were important in linking rural communities. It did this because the company is attempting to streamline its services as much as possible so as to protect its PSO routes from going into private hands in the coming years. Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus know that the loss of one subsidised route will endanger another route and that with every route lost to under-cutting multinational bus companies, public transport in Ireland will lurch another step towards its own death. The multinationals that will claim these routes will have little concern for the public good or the conditions of their workers. For them, unlike Dublin Bus, the only objective will be to protect shareholders and stock prices. The NBRU has also highlighted that current legislation does not offer clear protection from tendering to the other 90% of routes. It is clear that if the State tenders 10% of routes it is opening itself up to legal challenges which may bring privatisation even sooner than the Government planned. This legally weak position must be dealt with in legislation and I hope to put forward relevant amendments on Committee Stage.

Sinn Féin welcomes any progress on the development of greater bus services in Dublin. Bus rapid transport, BRT, could present that possibility. That being said, it is a great expense if only one route is being provided. Although three routes have been mentioned, only one is currently under consideration, the Swords route. Could this money not be better used in providing more buses, more quality bus corridors and bus lanes? Could some of the principles of BRT, such as priority crossing, be applied to some existing bus routes? The main benefit of BRT is that it is faster than other bus services because it treats buses separately from private cars. Some cities which saw great benefit from BRTs were cities which did not previously have bus lanes in any form. Approximately 150 cities use some form of BRT transport.

Improving our bus services and their access to the road could potentially make our entire network better. Metro North could also provide a high capacity rapid transport system to the airport. Metro North or a rail system would allow for high levels of passenger numbers whereas BRT would carry lower numbers of passengers. A rail system would take cars off the road and provide a cross-city service to the airport. Rather than an expensive headline-grabbing and shiny new BRT, perhaps what is needed is to support rather than undermine the bus service we have. If BRT is the chosen option then it must be under the management of Dublin Bus, a company that is expert in the delivery of bus services and is dedicated to public services and best placed to integrate any new service into the existing network. Sinn Féin would strongly oppose any move to put the BRT in private hands. The Luas is a good example of how even in the best of circumstances, private operators are not better than public operators.

I refer to sections 2 and 3 which deal with taxi services. I wish to raise some issues affecting taxi drivers. I welcome the extension to nine months instead of three of the period within which a taxi licence can be passed on to a bereaved family member. Sinn Féin called for greater access to this provision from its inception. I am pleased the Minister listened to that argument because three months was too short a time. We encountered many people who were very anxious as a result. This is a good move which will help many families. I recently spoke to the widow of taxi driver who had suffered a great deal of financial hardship in the wake of her husband's death. She was completely unaware of any provision for such a transfer. More needs to be done to communicate this to people like that lady. There was initial confusion with regard to this provision.

I also welcome the new period for paying fixed charges. We need to ensure that while regulating taxi drivers, punishing wrong-doing and upholding standards, we do not mistreat a group of hardworking people trying to make a living and contributing to our transport network with good levels of efficiency. The recent removal of taxi ranks across the State and the failure to provide alternatives for these people is not acceptable. We need taxis in our towns and cities and we need drivers to be able to ply for hire at ranks. The Luas cross-city project has led to major problems for taxi drivers. Construction work is part of a living breathing city but these drivers have been uprooted and put out by these works without any consideration for their needs in providing their service. We need ranks for taxi drivers and we need them where the customers are. I understand that this is often a role for the local authority but it is not always so easy for councils to respond in situations such as the major works involved in the Luas extension.

See this speech in context