Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I concur with several issues raised by Deputy Howlin. I do not wish to repeat them, but I have sent correspondence to the Department and I would be happy if the Minister replies in writing.

I will now talk about Government formation talks taking place between Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party. The incoming Government will face major challenges as a result of Covid-19 and its consequences. Whatever sensible short-term funding is needed to address resulting issues should be provided. Post Covid-19, the Government will also have to deal with Brexit, housing and carbon emissions. The role of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport is central to creating viable long-term solutions to all these issues. The Department that will provide the infrastructure to facilitate the long-term development of our economy. In my previous role as president of the Irish Road Haulage Association, IRHA, I observed regularly the consequences of the second-line effects of Government policy. All too often, Ministers pursue policies for perfectly legitimate objectives, sometimes inadvertently and sometimes without any regard to the disastrous consequences of those primary policies.

We have had experience of this in recent years, such as with the National Asset Management Agency, NAMA, collapsing the housing and building industry, an increase in heavy goods vehicles, HGVs, on the roads due to a reduction in load-carrying capacity and high-density guidelines to justify viable rail lines. All too often, Ministers are not in command of their portfolios and weak Ministers lead to bad Government. An idealistic Secretary General or official can become the master of his or her Minister and shape policy to meet his or her agenda. In formulating policy, Governments need to be conscious of their objectives and effects. Accurate data are essential to make informed decisions.

Transport faces three major challenges: providing an efficient infrastructure to deal with Brexit; providing a green rail network to accommodate meaningful reductions in carbon emissions and to facilitate efficient housing; and the moving of major infrastructure, such as Dublin Port, to meet all these challenges. While there is much talk and confusion coming from politicians regarding how to achieve targets set for a green agenda, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Transport is one area where change can be achieved faster and with lasting positive green results.

Now is the time to take a serious look at the nitrogen oxide, NOx, emissions polluting the air in Dublin and face the fact that Dublin Port, and all it entails, is the biggest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in this urban setting. Nitrogen oxide is linked strongly with traffic emissions and high levels affect our lung health. The Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, has found that two areas in Dublin have reached or exceed the EU limit on NOx emissions. Those are the M50 and the entrance to, and exit from, the Dublin Port Tunnel, areas that experience significant traffic congestion. We must remove traffic congestion from our capital city if we are serious about carbon emissions. This can be done by moving Dublin Port out of the city environs. All over the world, governments are initiating greener urban environments and all over Europe docklands are now home to parks, pleasure marinas and thousands of tourists, as well as architecturally-exciting residential developments and offices. Cities such as Copenhagen, Oslo and Barcelona have created new areas with low-rent artistic spaces, clubs, bars and cafes. Dublin Port is the greatest waste of prime land imaginable. The main port on the north side of the river comprises 510 acres, while the port on the south side of the river, although much smaller, still constitutes 130 acres of prime development land with waterfront aspects within about a mile of the city centre.

One wonders why on earth such a green policy has not been mentioned in Government talks. There has been no mention by any political representative, not even from the Green Party, of following such European and world trends. Such a proposal can, however, deliver cleaner air and provide much needed land for an overcrowded and growing city. The relocation of the port is a golden opportunity to ensure a permanent reduction in NOx emissions and to create a modern, high-density area within the city. The port lands offer an opportunity for the Land Development Agency, LDA, to deliver housing at scale. By 2040, Dublin Port will have reached full capacity. In three years, we will begin to build new and additional port facilities elsewhere on the east coast, informed by our masterplan for 2040 and the national planning framework 2040.

The moving of Dublin Port can be carried out with relative ease. Rosslare Europort is currently only at 40% capacity and is Ireland's most strategically placed port for roll-on, roll-off traffic while 60% of Dublin Port's traffic is roll-on, roll-off. Rosslare Europort has the potential and should be developed as a tier 1 port. It should endure little or no combustion congestion, and thereby NOx emissions are not an issue in the same realm as at Dublin Port. Rosslare Europort has the only other border inspection post after Dublin and, because of Brexit, has seen significant investments in facilities for regulatory inspections. It is a natural fit for Dublin Port's traffic. The one vital element that has been agreed for Rosslare Europort but not yet started is a separate port access road, and works should begin without further delay.

The high dependency being placed on Dublin Port is not sustainable, particularly because of the growth limitations. Further growth of Dublin Port will exacerbate the greenhouse gas emission level which, we all agree, must be reduced. The money that can be raised by selling the land contained in Dublin Port and the surrounding docklands can be used to upgrade Rosslare Europort and any movement of the lift-on, lift-off operations. A big bonus would be the vast reduction in NOx emissions having alleviated the congestion. If we are to take the greening of transport in Ireland seriously, we must take a good look at how we develop policy in relation to it. The truth is that Dublin-based politicians do not want this commercial activity moved out of the city. They are prepared to suffer and inflict the most dangerous emissions on their populations to keep their beloved port. I will watch with interest the position of the Green Party on NOx emissions.

We need to fund rail lines, not ghettos. Transport-oriented development, TOD, is a form of urban development that seeks to maximise the provisions of housing, employment, public services and leisure space near frequent high-quality train services. It is a form of development that is friendlier to public transport users, cyclists and pedestrians and it seeks to convert car trips to public and active transport trips. This, in turn, improves mobility and environmental conditions and delivers more efficient and sustainable urban development. Dublin Port and the docklands is exactly what one would imagine a strategy like TOD would look like, but transport-oriented development is a model that does not work practically for the regions. It is a cost-recovery model and for it to work, houses must be built to the density within the national framework to ensure passenger capacity for the rail service. However, the builders will not build at this density because they cannot sell the houses unless the rail infrastructure is there. If the housing is not built, Irish Rail will not provide a service unless it is viable, and unless subvention is continued, there is no hope. To say it is putting the cart before the horse is an understatement. The future of solving the housing problem is the greening of transport and providing high-speed electric trains with continued subvention on the basis that one must speculate to accumulate to assure people that they can get to work and to ensure they are not car-dependent. If we do not have strong leadership in transport, including a Minister who can join the dots beating the drum to the Department of Finance to safeguard the funding and who will ensure the greening of transport actually happens, we will be building the ghettos of the future.

Intrinsically linked to replacing dependence on car commutes is a high-speed train with capacity and a frequent timetable. People will use cars only at the weekend, thereby being far more likely to purchase an electric green alternative. Such a rail network is required in all regions. The EU provides significant funding for such projects, thereby enabling a future Government to provide subvention until the population drives the requirement independently. Our roads will be less congested, with usage primarily for heavy goods vehicles, HGVs, and essential journeys only. The development and building of houses will evolve if such infrastructures are in place. However, the densities of such developments should be left to the local authorities, which are best placed to ensure requirements in their areas are met, rather than urbanised plans being forced on them with no regard for the social issues that will ensue. Ballymun is an example of this. If we provide a high-speed rail network to ensure the greening of transport, we will ensure the targets set down in the current climate action plan have the potential to be achieved. Without this turnaround we will still be paying fines in the hundreds of millions for missed targets long into the future.

See this speech in context