Seanad debates

Wednesday, 23 March 2005

West Link Toll Bridge: Motion.

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Joe O'TooleJoe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to second the motion. I compliment my colleague, Senator Ross — after 20 years of trying — on finding an issue on which we are in absolute agreement. I am appalled by the Government amendment. I do not see the sense in it. It is utterly unpolitical and has the hallmark of people who have been too long in office. They are in a comfort zone. It does not reflect the views of anybody I know.

While I wholeheartedly support the motion, I do not support my colleague's final point. I do not know what it would cost to buy out the toll bridges but, on a very rough calculation, if NTR is earning €25 million or €30 million a year — this would probably rise to €40 million with the extra lanes — and that is capitalised at 5%, the sum involved is significant. If buying back the toll bridges was to cost as much as Luas, there would be a public outcry. We should take them back and do whatever appropriate deal can be done in that context. According to the Government amendment, the extra lanes are intended to increase the capacity of the M50. That could be amended to read "increase the income to NTR and the Government". NTR's point that €1 of every €1.80 goes to the Government is significant.

This causes extraordinary and unquantifiable angst to people during the day. It increases costs relating to child minding and productivity and increases the stress experiences by those who are delayed on the M50 each day. This is not all the fault of NTR. On each occasion a plan has been drawn up, it has been wrong. There are good reasons for this. In some cases, for example, nobody could have anticipated the significant increase in traffic. Extra lanes are about to be opened on the toll plaza.

Senator Morrissey has frequently raised the issue of placing large park and ride facilities at every junction on the M50. The absence of these is a problem. Making such facilities available would also require the provision of bus services to carry passengers along the radial routes, not the M50, into the city.

Does the Minister know that there is no free public park and ride facility on the north side of Dublin? Many people park their cars in the car parks of pubs on the N1, N2 and N3 before catching buses to work at 6 a.m. As part of any increase in lanes, NTR should be required to pay for the new lanes that will generate extra money. There should be a significant park and ride facility at each junction on the motorway.

In addition to extra lanes, a rail line should be laid alongside the M50. I do not understand why that is not done with every new road. It would provide a contact point for the length of the M50 and open a new range of possibilities to ease traffic in Dublin. Motorists would then get something back for funding the motorway.

There may be cities in Europe where one must pay to travel on main ring roads. However, even though I have driven through all of western Europe, I do not know of one city where this is the case. Even in cities comparable in the size to Dublin — I refer here to Lyons — when one enters the urban zone, one leaves the toll area. This is the normal practice. Anyone travelling long distances on continental or French roads, in particular, will find this. I cannot understand why we are stuck with this problem and cannot find a solution.

I have referred on many occasions to toll bridges. What bothers me most about the deal done 30 years ago are not just the issues raised by Senator Ross. I accept the argument that much of what happened could not be anticipated. I resented at the time that taxpayers were funding the building of a 20 km or 30 km road while another crowd was building a bridge across it and gaining from it. I am on record at the time as saying it was a bad deal. As we move forward, we must examine the broader issues. I am certain that the points raised by Senator Ross about the public view on this issue are correct. There is public anxiety and public opposition to this project. There is no support for the 20% increase which happened and more money being put into the coffers of NTR and the Government at the expense of people who are responsible for productivity in this country.

We heard this morning that a 6% increase in economic growth is expected over the next number of years. This is being delivered by the people who are being charged to get to work to deliver this economic growth. This is neither correct nor necessary. It does not fit in with the plan to share wealth.

We need to find a legal means to extricate ourselves from this situation. I do not believe we can afford to pay a capitalised amount based on the current significant and extraordinary income. The more we increase the income, the more difficult this will become. We should attempt to reduce toll charges before there are any negotiations on a buy-out. Agreeing to increased toll charges, while talking about a buy-out, is simply spending money to line the coffers of National Toll Roads which already has plenty money. We need to pull back from this. I do not blame the company. It exists to make a profit; that is its God. The bottom line is that the company's job is to make a profit. It is up to us to put restraints on it and give it back to the people. We should introduce Bertie's socialism to modern Ireland. This is an amenable step forward towards that particular philosophy.

The motion tabled by Senator Ross will strike a chord and get support from ordinary people. The Government's amendment fails to address and engage with the issue; it is a diversion.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.