Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Barry for raising this topical issue. I share the pain of the hundreds of thousands of commuters who have been inconvenienced by the disruption caused to Luas services since the commencement of this industrial dispute. The fact that it looks like we will endure yet more disruption over the coming period is particularly disappointing considering that agreement was possible with the other three grades involved initially with this dispute. I hope that all in the House would share my view that the taxpayer cannot be expected to bear any financial burden in this dispute.

Any resolution reached cannot impact on the contract that is in place between Transdev and the National Transport Authority-Transport Infrastructure Ireland relating to the operation of the Luas. My focus is to protect the interests of the travelling public and to encourage the parties to work to resolve their differences. Any agreement must deliver sustainable wage rates that do not involve higher fares for the travelling public. Of course, I am aware that there are those who have sought to capitalise on this dispute to attack the very manner in which Luas services are operated. However, I think the success of the Luas speaks for itself.

Luas has been a fantastic addition to our public transport offering since its introduction in 2004. Its success is down to many things: the State's provision of the infrastructure, the private sector's provision of a quality service in a cost-effective manner, and of course the extremely hard work of the employees themselves. The Luas operating framework means we, as taxpayers, continue to own a fantastic piece of public infrastructure and allows the State to ensure value for money for the taxpayer in its operation through allowing companies tender for the right to operate it. In fact, it is a statutory requirement that there be competitive tendering before any award of any Luas contract.

As with other Members, I am of course aware that Transdev has now written to SIPTU regarding the activation of certain clauses in their collective agreement regarding the operation of the sick pay scheme. Similarly, I am aware of announcements by Transdev regarding the measures it may take if the dispute continues, as well as the fact it is now imposing financial penalties on employees engaged in strike action. These actions highlight the seriousness of the situation and underline the importance in securing agreement between both parties to resolve this dispute.

I believe that any intervention by me, or indeed by others without a legal function or role in this dispute, is not helpful. Some of these calls for intervention appear to believe that the taxpayer should be forced to take out the public chequebook or raid the State's ATM machine and underwrite the resolution of a dispute between a private company and its employees. That will not happen. Resolution of the dispute lies with the employer and the employees. If the two sides can narrow their differences, then I hope that the State's industrial relations institutions can assist in facilitating an acceptable and affordable settlement.

There have been other calls for the establishment of a specific task force to deal with the issue. I do not favour the establishment of such a task force given that we have industrial relations bodies in place which stand ready to assist the two parties in reaching an agreement. Agreement is possible. We know that from the agreement already reached with three of the four grades. Therefore the two parties need to get around a table, and if they require assistance, the State, through the Workplace Relations Commission and the Labour Court, is ready to help. I know that all of us in the House would encourage both sides in this dispute to agree a sustainable and affordable agreement which is beneficial to all sides and ends the disruption being inflicted upon the travelling public.

See this speech in context