Seanad debates

Wednesday, 23 March 2005

West Link Toll Bridge: Motion.

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Independent)

I move:

That Seanad Éireann calls on the Government to take urgent measures to open the West Link Toll Bridge on Dublin's M50 motorway.

We are here to discuss the issue of the West Link toll bridge. This motion calls on the Government to take urgent measures to ensure that the West Link toll bridge is opened as soon as possible to alleviate the traffic problems on that stretch of the M50. It is a deliberately broad motion, designed to give an opening to the Government to come forward with any proposals it sees fit to alleviate the appalling problem that faces commuters on the M50 at the West Link.

The lack of logic regarding the toll bridge plaza is staggering. If one goes out there at peak hours from Monday to Friday and stands on the southern side, when the majority of the traffic is going north, one can see miles of vehicles on one side of the gates and empty space on the other. A simple solution would be to open those gates to the traffic. National Toll Roads, NTR, and the Government have decided that this is not the optimum solution.

When a deal was struck between NTR and the authorities in 1987, the projections for traffic estimated that in the region of 11,000 cars per day would use the motorway. Those 11,000 cars represent only one third of the vehicles that actually use the M50. Approximately 95,000 vehicles pass through the West Link toll bridge plaza each day. Such levels of traffic were not even dreamt of at the time the deal was struck. Some people would say that NTR deserves its good luck because it took a risk and is reaping the benefits. That is a fair point. However, what is happening at present is not in the public interest. It is damaging to the public good, to the people involved and to the economy. All that time wasted by vibrant, energetic and often young people is indefensible in economic terms. However, this particular wrong continues to obtain.

The campaign to open the toll gates was provoked by an extraordinary 20% price rise, imposed on 3 January 2005, from €1.50 to €1.80. That was an opportunist price increase and an extraordinary piece of profiteering. NTR is well aware that current traffic levels were not even conceived of at the time of the agreement. It knows that the agreement is water tight and it is also aware that the problem of the M50 and the toll bridge will worsen in the coming years. The worse the problem gets, the better it is for NTR. The situation is going to get a great deal worse because the number of vehicles passing through the toll plaza will increase and NTR will make even more money.

What are we to do about this? There is an obligation on the Government to do something to alleviate the situation because NTR is not going to do anything. Building another lane on the M50 will make the situation worse in the short term. We know that the proposed repairs to the M50 will take approximately five years to complete. Lanes will be closed during this time. As a result, when the traffic increases, the capacity for carrying it will decrease. This is an acute situation. The M50 is not yet completed but I suspect it will be by August of this year. What will be the result of that? When the last leg is completed, there will be even more traffic on the road and the situation at the toll bridge will continue to worsen. As the average motorist is obliged to endure these difficulties, NTR will make even greater profits. That is immoral, wrong and unethical.

I do not dispute that a deal was struck by NTR in 1987 — a further deal was reached at a later date — which was brilliant in its conception and in terms of its enterprise. However, no Government can allow a business to develop in a way that is so constantly and obviously against the public interest.

What is NTR's reaction to all of this? Apart from increasing the toll from €1.50 to €1.80, which it is perfectly entitled to do under the agreement, the company has conducted a particularly lively lobby in recent weeks. When this campaign began, we arranged to send a large number of e-mails to NTR, the Government and the Department of Transport. Over 5,000 were sent before the campaign was halted. I apologise to the Minister for blocking his in-box for so long but these things must be done. I am aware that the message got through. Irate drivers from Meath and Kildare, in particular, informed the Minister that the position was unacceptable. NTR received the same number of e-mails and proceeded to reply to them meticulously and on an individual basis.

Every Member of the House was lobbied prior to this debate and received a significant amount of literature that contains misinformation. This is the way lobbying works in the House. Lobbyists have enormous clout and power. It appears that in recent months these people have had free access to Members of the House. The average motorist does not enjoy this privilege. If NTR's lobbyists are effective, they will copperfasten the deal with the Government and motorists will continue to suffer. That is neither fair nor right.

We should give greater consideration to the attitude of the Government — which has done nothing in terms of lessening the misery experienced by commuters — than to that of NTR. Formal and informal contacts with the Government draw the response that a watertight contract was agreed and nothing can be done. The Government says it is tied into the contract so everybody must continue to suffer. Fortunately, the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, broke ranks by objecting to the price rise and asking that something be done about it. God bless him for that. We may see him later this evening, if we are lucky. The Minister rapped him over the knuckles in an effective way and Deputy Callely has been silent since. If Deputy Callely comes before the House, I will offer him some of my summing-up time to tell us whether his position has changed. It would be interesting to know that. The Government's initial position of doing nothing is unfortunate.

The original deal, over which the Government stands, and which it uses as its protection, was unprecedented in its generosity to a company. No such deal with any toll company today would be tolerated now. NTR was given preferential monopolistic treatment over which no Government could stand now.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.