Dan Boyle (Green Party)

It is apt that we have this report at a time of considerable public controversy with regard to the funding of bus services. The impression has been created that the Government has been providing fewer resources for Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann, but subvention to both companies has remained the same. What has happened is that the number of passengers has decreased and this is what has led to the decisions taken by management with regard to the curtailment of services and routes, particularly in the case of Dublin Bus. This is regrettable, but it was not a Government decision.

It could be argued that Government could increase subvention and if resources were available, that should be given serious consideration. However, due to the current economic situation the two companies concerned must cut their cloth according to their resources. Although I wish it were otherwise, we provide lower subvention for public transport compared to other European countries. In recent years the subvention rate has increased and, by default, will, ironically, increase further as the cost base of both Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann is reduced. This is the sad effect of the current situation.

We must not only acknowledge the slight increase in subvention over the past ten years, but also recognise the significant capital spent, which has provided some 1,400 buses for both companies. While these were mainly replacement buses, some 271 were new buses. This demonstrates the redirecting of a commitment towards public transport, particularly bus transport.

We need to make public transport more diverse and to provide people with more options, but at the same time, any public transport policy must have a bus-centred approach. This is true not just for Dublin, but for the rest of the country. The figures mentioned by Senator Ryan, indicating the level of subvention for Dublin Bus as opposed to Bus Éireann, demonstrate how significantly the major urban centres outside of Dublin continue to be at a disadvantage. Dublin Bus gets two and a half times the subvention rate provided to Bus Éireann, despite the fact it has alternative public transport in the form of DART, Luas and suburban rail. In all our other major urban centres all we have is a bus service, often quite a meagre service.

Despite this, the report indicates there are better management and efficiencies in Bus Éireann than in Dublin Bus. We need to ask the reason for this. Two years ago, Dublin Bus earned a profit of €5 million, but this year it has suffered significant losses. Following the introduction of Luas and an overall increase in the numbers of people using public transport, Dublin Bus, despite being given additional resources and new buses, found itself carrying fewer passengers. We must ask why this has happened.

Ten years ago, I was appointed through the social partnership process to represent the community and voluntary sector on the public transport consultative forum, which was established by the Department of Transport and included trade union and business representatives and representatives of community interests, to examine the direction public transport should take in the years ahead. It is somewhat depressing that we have not moved far down that road, but we should still give consideration to some of the proposals made then.

We had a somewhat fruitless argument about whether State transport companies should be privatised or whether more private interests should be included. There are other alternatives, such as the French public transport system, the city-based bus system in particular. A method used in France to reinvigorate the public transport systems in metropolitan areas is to put the management of the companies, which are municipal companies, up for tender every five years or so. Therefore, there is a new management system every five years. This system is successful because it avoids the ennui and predictability we see here with public transport.

This may be off the point, but I remember as a first time councillor visiting the manager of a train station in Cork who did not seem to realise that the towns of Cobh and Mallow were of equal size, but was considering withdrawing a successful train service to Cobh. I have often found it frustrating that many of the principals in our public transport companies do not use public transport. It makes the situation even more difficult when we have this kind of mindset in the management of companies meant to be promoting public transport and making it more efficient.

We still have difficulty in Ireland convincing the public that public transport should be the first option for getting from A to B. This is the norm in most countries, but in Ireland public transport seems to be the poor relation. Until we can get past this mindset, we will continue to be, despite recent economic circumstances, one of the most car-dependent countries in the world. There is no reason we cannot have greater reliance on public transport. I welcome the increased subvention and capital for public transport, but we are still in a situation where the greater preponderance of resources is given to private motor transport. Until we get the right equilibrium in this regard, we will still treat public transport as the poor relation.

Dublin has successful alternatives to buses in the Luas and the DART. Despite this, we have seen obstructionism on the part of Dublin Bus, in terms of both competency and management, with regard to bringing about the changes needed in public transport in our capital city. The main reason we do not have an integrated ticket system — as is found in most developed public transport systems of the world — is reluctance on the part of Dublin Bus management. Until it overcomes this difficulty, Dublin Bus will remain a loss-making company and will be portrayed as a company that does not fulfil its potential to meet public transport needs.

Given the lower level of subvention it receives, Bus Éireann does far better with the resources available to it and has a more effective management system. The Government needs to discover why the company with fewer resources is doing better than the company that receives more. This is the essence of what we must learn from this report and I hope we do that. If we put the lessons we learn into practice, we can, I hope, point the way, because we have a considerable journey to make. I am not playing a pun here on the Iarnród Éireann slogan — we'll get you there, eventually. Public transport has a journey to go, but it can get there given the appropriate resources, political support and attention to the details of this report.