Dáil debates

Thursday, 12 June 2014

Topical Issue Debate

National Road Network Service Areas

5:10 pm

Photo of Martin HeydonMartin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | 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.

Photo of Leo VaradkarLeo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for the opportunity to address this issue and to clarify the position regarding the provision of service areas by the NRA on the motorway network. As Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding regarding the national roads programme. The construction, improvement and maintenance of individual national roads, including service areas, is a matter for the National Roads Authority under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007 in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. In particular, section 54 of the Roads Act 1993 specifically provides for the National Roads Authority or a local authority to provide or operate service areas.

In 2005, the then Minister for Transport asked the NRA to review its policy of generally notproviding service areas on national roads, particularly on the expanding network of access - controlled motorways and dual carriageways. Arising from this review, the NRA decided to proceed with a programme to provide service areas across the major inter-urban network. The imperative to have service areas on the network arises as a result of a number of factors: the major inter-urban motorway network is largely complete; the EU working time directives contain specific requirements for permissible driving and rest times for professional drivers, including hauliers; the significant road safety benefits of rest areas for other road users; and the TEN-T policy. Much of our national road network is part of the TEN-T network, and regulations include specific requirements with regard to parking and rest facilities on the core road network.

In October 2007, the NRA published its initial policy on the provision of service areas which incorporated a map showing indicative locations. In light of the funding constraints that emerged, the NRA scaled back on the development of service areas. At present, there are NRA service areas at three locations on the network. Two are located on the M1, at Lusk and Castlebellingham on the way to Belfast, and one is on the Galway road at Enfield. All three of these service areas provide a high range of services, including parking, fuel and restaurant facilities. The current NRA service areas that are in operation were developed as PPP projects. Overall, the NRA has indicated that there is a high level of public satisfaction with these service areas, as evidenced in customer surveys. A second group of three service areas is currently under development. The one at Gorey is at construction stage and those at Kilcullen and Athlone are at tender stage. These service areas, which are located on one side with an overbridge, are due to be in operation at some stage between now and 2017.

In light of developments at EU level, including the TEN-T regulations, the NRA has published a revised draft policy document entitled NRA Service Areas on the National Road Network. This document sets out the background to the existing NRA motorway service area policy, the legal context, plans for future needs, proposed locations and so on. Members of the public, interested groups, industry etc., have been invited to review the document and participate in the public consultation process. The needs analysis carried out by the authority determined an objective of locating online NRA service areas approximately every 45 to 60 km along the motorway and high quality dual carriageways. In addition, the road safety strategy sets out the need for a total of five additional service areas, to be provided by 2020. It is acknowledged that the revised motorway service area policy is a long-term plan and the full programme of proposed locations would involve a very substantial commitment in the current constrained budgetary situation.

The purpose of the public consultation is, therefore, to seek views, examine options and allow interested groups to submit suggestions and proposals. The public consultation process is being managed by the NRA and the closing date for receipt of responses is 23 June. Following this, the feedback will be evaluated and considered both by the NRA and my Department.

5:20 pm

Photo of Martin HeydonMartin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to bring to the Minister's attention a matter of which he will be aware and to which he referred. In my constituency of Kildare South, just south of Kilcullen, between junctions 2 and 3 on the M9, there is the development of an online service area in a bundle with other services areas, including in Athlone on the M6 and the Gorey bypass. I want to know why private enterprise was not given an opportunity to try to provide a site before the NRA charged in to use taxpayer's money. It went to tender previously but could not attract private sector interest. In some way, one could argue that the NRA’s sites are possibly over-spec and do not meet commercial realities. I have talked to people involved the industry who tell me it does not stack up or make commercial sense for the private sector to develop according to the current spec. Whether that is the case, this is not Germany or Italy. We are developing this site and anybody who drives north on the M9 will see the diggers onsite, but it is still at the tender stage and we have not attracted private sector investment. Moreover, the site will require the construction of another bridge, even though plenty of bridges were built when the motorway was built some years ago. Why can there not be a development like that at junction 14 at an existing bridge instead of having to build a new one? We have gone ahead with developing the site without having a private operator in place. I want to know why we are spending money on it and why Kilcullen was selected. It is a very strange choice, given that the site is a long way from Waterford. There is no question that service areas are needed along the M9 and the nearest one to Kilcullen is 25 km away. Even in the draft policy, in which the NRA references the position in Australia, Germany and Italy, most of the distances are set at 50 km, 60 km and 70 km, while TEN-T refers to a distance of 100 km. However, we are developing this site at Kilcullen which is 25 km from the nearest station, when an area much further south would have struck me as being the optimum at which to locate the first service area. I do not believe we are getting the best value for taxpayers’ money.

Photo of Leo VaradkarLeo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Several issues arise. First, it is important to point out that this is just the public consultation phase. It is not a policy decision and the NRA is welcoming an input from the private sector, local authorities and, of course, public representatives. I know TEN-T very well as I was chairman of the Council of Ministers when it went through the European process. What it states is that we should have rest areas every 100 km and that this is in line with the needs of society, the market and the environment in order to provide appropriate parking space for commercial road users and for an appropriate level of safety and security. It seems the NRA’s document interprets this to mean that, in an Irish context, service areas should be more frequent than every 100 km. My own view is the reverse, that we probably need them to be less frequent than every 100 km. I would be more in line with the road safety strategy which suggests we need a few more but not one every 40 km or 50 km.

The Deputy’s point about the private sector is well made. I hope potential private sector operators and developers take the opportunity presented by the public consultation process to indicate very clearly what they could offer, whether online or offline services. On the M9, Dublin-Waterford, we all agree that a service area is needed. One can almost drive the whole way without finding anywhere to stop for petrol or to take a break. Originally, there were to be two service areas, one at Kilcullen and one at Paulstown, which is probably how the NRA came up with the location, as there would have been one one third of the way along the route and a second two thirds of the way along it. Had there been a plan just for one, perhaps somewhere further south might have made more sense, but that decision was made a long time ago.