Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

As I came over to this debate in Seanad Éireann, I wondered whether I had missed some fact, issue of substance or policy idea that might not have been considered. As colleagues know, I always enjoy the debate in this House, which is always of a very high quality. I was particularly concerned that those who have been to the fore in discussing this issue, either orally or in written form, would bring something substantive to the debate. I need not have had any such concerns.

I thank those on both sides of the House who have dealt with the facts and proposed ideas constructively, asked questions quite legitimately and have sought answers. I have always been comfortable and happy to be in that space regardless of how difficult the questions are or how big the challenge is. I am driven by making decisions and finding solutions.

I am glad of the opportunity which this motion provides to set out the position regarding the upgrade of the M50 and the broader programme of investment in transport infrastructure in the greater Dublin area. I hope that by the time I am finished many of the questions will have been answered. The existing M50 ring road is the result of more than three decades of planning and construction during a period in which Dublin and the country as a whole have experienced significant economic development and change. As a result the Dublin road network has experienced massive traffic growth and the M50 is now the busiest section of road in Ireland. The increase in our car ownership rates and changes in travel patterns have resulted in major congestion occurring during peak times on many parts of the Dublin road network, including the M50.

The upgrade scheme will have significant benefits for road users as it will expand the capacity of the M50 to deal with 50% more traffic than at present, improve average peak hour speeds, reduce traffic congestion on the radial routes and improve traffic flow on the whole of the Dublin road network. With the full upgrade of the M50, average traffic speeds on the wider Dublin road network are predicted to increase by up to 9% in the morning peak hour and up to 12% in the off-peak periods over the first year of operation in 2010 compared with a situation where the scheme is not upgraded. The opening last year of the final link of the M50 south-eastern motorway delivered major benefits, and we will shortly see the opening to traffic of the Dublin Port tunnel.

The completion of these projects, along with the Naas Road widening and the upgrade projects on the N2, will deliver important improvements to the capital's road network and is further evidence of what the Government is working to achieve, namely, a high-quality network providing reduced journey times and greater journey time certainty to support development and underpin competitiveness. This development in the road network will be complemented by significant development in public transport to which I will refer later.

The M50 upgrade scheme is being planned in two phases and involves the widening of approximately 31 km of the motorway from two to three lanes in each direction, from the M50-M1 interchange near Dublin Airport through to the Sandyford interchange and the upgrade of ten junctions along this length. Phase 1 of the scheme, the contract for which was recently signed and which will commence construction in a matter of weeks, is being delivered by means of a design and build contract and involves the widening of the carriageway to three lanes between the Red Cow, N7, the Galway road, N4 roundabouts and the upgrading of the interchanges. This phase is to be completed by mid-2008 and is being funded by the Exchequer. Phase 2 is being procured as a PPP contract and involves the widening of the remainder to three lanes and the upgrade of other interchanges. I understand that the contract for this phase is expected to be awarded in April 2007 with construction to be completed in 2010.

A crucial element of the M50 upgrade scheme is the installation of barrier-free tolling. As I have stated on a number of occasions, my objective is to secure significantly enhanced capacity and an increased level of service on the M50 for road users, including through an early move to barrier-free tolling. I welcome, therefore, the decision by the National Roads Authority to terminate discussions with National Toll Roads regarding the West Link and to effectively begin the process of removing the West Link toll plaza and its replacement by a free flow toll arrangement. I understand that the NRA will be undertaking, in the course of this year, a comprehensive traffic study as a basis for deciding the details of the free flow tolling arrangements, including the toll level and the technology to be used. The NRA will then submit its specific proposals for the free flow toll arrangement for Government approval.

It is a legal requirement, as part of the planning permission granted by the local authority and as a condition of the upgrade of the M50, that a full free flow demand management study be carried out on the M50. This was not something invented in the past few days or thrown into the pot. It was the local authority councillors, the majority of whom are Labour Party and Fine Gael councillors, and good luck to them, who put that in as part of the planning requirements and the conditions of allowing the upgrade to go ahead. That is a statement of fact which is being ignored by many people.

I welcome and agree with that policy approach because having completed a €1 billion upgrade on the M50, we never want to return to the type of congestion that exists today. If we are to be upfront and honest about this, we need to know well into the future the extent of the traffic on the M50 and how to ensure from everybody's perspective, including, specifically, the road users, that they will have a good free flow system on that piece of motorway permanently into the future.

I want to make it clear that the free flow toll arrangement in 2008 will be a single point toll, that the toll will be set at a level equivalent to today's level, index linked, and will fund phase 2 of the M50 upgrade, the cost of free flow tolls and the payment of compensation to NTR from the toll revenue.

I want to state, for the benefit of everybody here, that it was extraordinarily mischievous to suggest that we had to find, on the backs of motorists using the M50, an extra €1.5 billion or whatever to pay, first, for the upgrade and, second, whatever the cost to NTR would be in the future. That is based on the toll revenue as it exists today. There is no imprimatur from me to the NRA or anybody else to load huge increases on motorists using the M50. It will not happen and it is not required. Let us remove, therefore, the second myth from the equation.

My Department is also preparing proposals for amending legislation to strengthen the enforcement provisions in relation to the non-payment of a toll in a barrier-free environment. The introduction of this legislation at the earliest opportunity is a key priority of mine. I want to say, as it was raised by the Opposition, that this legislation, with I hope the assistance of Fine Gael and no doubt the Labour Party, will be facilitated through both Houses this year, well in advance of whether we will have a full free flow tolling system and the need for it in operation. There is no issue with regard to the legislation. Most of the work on it is complete and I will bring it before both Houses in due course. There will be no delay and no delay leading to the delivery of the new system.

The approach now being adopted reflects the reality of a binding legal contract between the NRA and NTR which gives the latter certain rights. Some commentators seem to consider that it is open to the Government or me, and the NRA to simply abrogate these rights and to unilaterally change the terms of a contract approved in principle by Government in 1984 and concluded in 1987. This is not possible. Neither was it possible when the NRA negotiated the supplemental agreement in 2000. The supplemental agreement for the second West Link bridge had to be negotiated within the provisions of the original 1987 agreement. In the circumstances, the approach being adopted by the NRA represents the best approach to resolving a very difficult problem and is one I fully support.

The M50 upgrade project was approved by An Bord Pleanála early last year. I believe we would all agree that the NRA has made very good progress in getting phase 1 to construction.

Before leaving the M50 issue, it should be noted that, as the chief executive of the NRA indicated to the Committee of Public Accounts, recently the planning permission granted for the upgrade requires that the NRA, in future years, continues to address the need to prevent future traffic growth from returning the upgraded M50 to unacceptable congestion conditions. He indicated in this regard that any contract entered into for barrier-free tolling arrangements must allow the NRA the flexibility to accommodate and satisfy these planning permission requirements.

I want to deal with the issue of why that may take two years. From my perspective and that of the Government, the quicker we can make the move from a fixed tolling barrier system to a free flow system, the better. We must be honest in this House, however, because I will not pretend that we are in a position, as a sovereign Government, to ignore international procurement rules. To procure such a move in a public tendering process takes, on average, one year, moving at a good pace. If we get that done and have a free flow system up and running within another 11 months, it will be a record for this country.

Let us not pretend that I or any Minister has, within our remit, permission to ignore all the procurement requirements that we are internationally obliged to adhere to in the context of a move from the barrier fixed system to a free tolling system. I would like to announce to the people at 9 a.m. tomorrow that we will have that in place by 3 p.m. in the afternoon. Those who pretend that this is in some way possible are grossly misleading people. Those are the facts.

Others are suggesting that we lift the barriers tomorrow morning and that there are various ways of doing it. Let them be honest and say that the taxpayer must pick up the bill for those who are not paying when the barriers are open.

To take such an approach would be a very substantial penalty on all taxpayers, not just the users of the M50. If that is the position of the Fine Gael Party, it should say so. It should say that it wants tens of millions of euro taken away from health, education or wherever, but should stop being dishonest on this issue. What I have said is a clear unequivocal statement of the facts and I will debate the issues with anybody, on any platform or forum. People should not make up so-called urban myths and legends that I am supposed to have said over the past week or two. I find myself in the extraordinary position comparable to the Lyndon Johnson maxim, which has become currency to the effect that: "I know he did not say it, but I want to hear him deny it".

It now appears that once the Labour Party says I said something, ergo I said it and it becomes a fact. The fact is that I did not. It is as simple as that. I have set out consistently this evening everything that has happened over the past two weeks. People were saying for the past two years that somebody should do something about the fixed toll plaza and NTR. I was the Minister who had the courage to do it. People should stop pretending that I have done something different to what everybody has been calling for over the last 12 months, because the facts clearly speak for themselves.

As a Minister of the Government, or as anyone else, I cannot go to someone's house and tell the owner that I am taking it over and he or she should find something else to do. People have rights. We might not like them, but they have them and we have to respect them. Senator Dooley put that point very well. Whatever one's views of the original contract it added to the infrastructure of the country.

With hindsight, it is an awful contract and we have learned from it. Never again would or has a Government entered into such a contract. It is simply beyond——