Paschal Donohoe (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and thank him for his statement on the grave position of the bus market in Dublin and other providers of bus services. In my contribution I will refer directly to the points made by the Minister of State but I will begin by referencing the current position. A statement was made very recently by one of the unions involved in Dublin Bus to the effect that its members would go out and stay on strike until the needs of its members have been met. I have not up to now heard that statement changed or retracted but it is disappointing to hear such a statement.

With very few if any exceptions, the trade union movement has been very responsible and proactive in trying to deal with many of the difficulties faced by our country. I would look to the actions taken by SIPTU in dealing with Aer Lingus and the leadership it exhibited in finding new deals and new ways of working to ensure the interests of its members are protected and recognised while also responding to the changed circumstances that Aer Lingus and our country finds itself in. I would also look to the statement put forward by the ICTU relating to a ten-point economic recovery plan and although I do not agree with everything in it, it is a positive, constructive and detailed contribution to try to find a way forward in the awful difficulties of our country.

These can be contrasted with a statement where a body indicates it will take its members out on strike and not come back until the matter is dealt with. That is the last thing we want and such action would be very bad for members of the union and place them in awful difficulty. It would cause chaos in Dublin and the surrounding region. Things are bad enough for people at the moment trying to get in and out of their jobs, staying in employment and dealing with the mounting levels of stress that obtain. To find our buses disappearing from our roads and streets at this point would deal a hammer blow to businesses within Dublin which depend on transport links for their employees and customers getting in. It would be a severe blow for economic activity and the morale of our country.

I call on the union in question to revise that statement and look to deal with the matter differently. I call for the full machinery of the State that has the expertise and ability to deal with issues such as this to become involved and ensure something such as this does not happen. It is the last thing our bus market and country needs at the moment.

There are a number of points to be made about the Minister of State's contribution. The overall theme is that many of the measures mentioned are to be welcomed and recognised. The question should be asked why this kind of work was not done sooner and why the kind of reforms being spoken about were not implemented when times were good so that the right decisions could have been made. We find ourselves, when times are bad, looking at the wrong decisions being made. It would amount to nothing less than a colossal failure if Government transport policy resulted in a reduction in the number of buses — bus transport still being the most popular form of public transport here — in operation on routes at a time when commuters need them most. Why were the measures outlined in the report not implemented sooner? Why were they not in place to ensure members of Dublin Bus and the other bus companies would have had time to understand the changes that were needed and for such changes to be gradually implemented to ensure bus users and bus providers would be far better placed to deal with the terrible difficulties we now face?

There are three areas where the implementation of such measures would have been most significant. The first one, touched on by the Minister of State, is the huge investment in public transport by the taxpayer. He rightly referred to the huge amount of money that has been paid to Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann since 2000, amounting to nearly €800 million. In 2009 the allocation will amount to approximately €125 million. The key question is why was the release of such a large amount of taxpayers' money to these organisations not tied to performance measures, measures related to the reliability of bus services and the ability to meet the transport needs of commuters?

In a recent discussion on this matter at a meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport, the Minister for Transport admitted that he could not find reliability measures to gauge if buses were arriving on time at bus depots and bus stations. He said he had provided a map to many of the stakeholders who were involved in this crisis showing huge swathes of the Dublin region where bus routes are not provided or where bus services are not available at the frequency required by commuters. The question that must be asked is why was nearly €1 billion of taxpayers' money released to these companies during the past nine years without this work being done, namely, without ensuring reliability measures were in place and such reforms were implemented to ensure that bus services on routes operate at the required frequencies. Responsibility for this lies with the Government. Having regard to challenges we face in terms of Dublin Bus and, to a lesser extent, Bus Éireann, I question whether such challenges are not a symbol of the difficulties we face in terms of public expenditure, given that large subventions were made available to these organisations without asking them for explicit guarantees on the provision of their services.

I am not the only one who is saying this. The Booz Allen Hamilton report, commissioned by the Department of Transport approximately a year ago, examined whether the amounts of money released to these companies was adequate and how such allocations stacked up with allocations to providers in other European countries? It had two interesting conclusions. One was that the quantity of money being released to these companies is in line with that being made available to providers in other European countries. That was reassuring. The other question was why was the releasing of such moneys not made conditional on certain elements being delivered. That was an obvious point. Why were the moneys not released on condition that a certain mileage was covered each year or certain performance indicators were met? Now that the Government and the political system will need to manage the difficulties faced by these companies in the coming months, the question that must be asked is why was €800 million of taxpayers' money released during the past ten years without the necessary preparatory work being done to ensure we had an efficient and a fair bus market in Dublin?

I wish to raise two other points, one of which concerns the Dublin Transport Authority. We had excellent debates here on the legislation establishing that authority. An innovative and welcome measure is that the DTA will have the power to be the provider of last resort in terms of transport. If for some reason transport services are not available, whether it be bus or train services or the Luas service, the DTA will have the ability to step in and provide that service. As we approach a period of what appears to be significant industrial upheaval in our bus market, I want to ensure that a measure such as that will be examined by the Government because the legislative foundation for that measure is in place. The Army made a statement recently that, if called upon, it would be willing to step in and provide essential services. I hope that will be the last scenario we will need to consider. We cannot reach a situation where there will be no buses in our capital or throughout the country. That is unacceptable. We need to examine ways to ensure that is avoided. The law is in place to provide for that. We must ensure that the Government takes this matter seriously and puts in place new or different measures to ensure that we do not find ourselves in that awful situation.

I wish to refer to the role the private sector can play in dealing with the position we face. I lived in London for six years and I saw the diabolical state of the bus market in that city resulting from its deregulation. Under no circumstances should people find themselves in a similar situation here. It is a characteristic of human nature that a person will work harder when he or she knows that another company or person is seeking to do the same work. I have to work very hard as a politician, as does the Minister of State, because he and I know that somebody else in our constituencies would like our jobs. That is a powerful motivator in terms of human nature.

The Minister of State signalled that legislation would be introduced to reform the bus licensing regime. When it is being introduced, we should ensure that, if there are other operators that can provide bus services in an efficient manner and at good value for the taxpayer, we find a way of allowing them to operate in a regulated manner. In opening the market we would need to ensure that such operators complement a well funded well run public service provider. Both elements have a role to play in ensuring our bus market works not only now but in the years to come. As was said here earlier, we know that the difficulties we now face will not disappear next month or even next year. We must plan to ensure the necessary foundations are put in place to provide efficient services and guard against ever finding ourselves in a situation where huge amounts of taxpayers' money is released to organisations without the right reforms having been made to guarantee the provision of good companies and markets to serve the needs of our commuters.