Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Page 31 of the Aecom report states that the rail safety programme between 1999 and 2013 cost ¤1.7 billion. Indecon looked at that and found that it had saved 123 animals. They must be the most expensive animals ever. We must see where these programmes yield a return. In comparison, the safety budget of the Road Safety Authority is ¤18.6 million and the budget for the Health and Safety Authority is under ¤20 million in a year. We have these clichéd, very expensive programmes but does anybody ever evaluate them? That is my concern. There is an immense task before the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, and the Minister of State, Deputy Alan Kelly. The companies just continue on and then get into difficulties in the middle of the year, which is why this Bill is before us. Incidentally, page 93 of that document states that non-stopping private sector services are very competitive with rail in terms of end-to-end journeys. The costs are shown on page 141. It is 12 cent per kilometre by rail and another 12 cent in subsidy while it is 7 cent by bus, some of which require no subsidy.

There are serious resource allocation issues that were not addressed, certainly before the Minister's term of office. While we are under pressure all the time about special needs assistants, home helps and so forth, some of these programmes are apparently being flagged through without question. The Minister mentioned one of them, the Dublin city centre re-signalling project from Lansdowne Road to Malahide. It cost ¤290 million. That is more than the Luas cost. What type of signals are involved and is there an independent appraisal as to whether that ¤290 million was a worthwhile investment? What is it supposed to do? Before the Abbeylara judgment limited the power of the Oireachtas there was an investigation by the House of a signalling programme on lightly used main lines which went from ¤18 million to ¤63 million. The inquiry had to be dropped because the courts decided the House could not investigate things where people might be found guilty.

All of these programmes must be analysed. The maintenance cost for a kilometre of track is ¤95,000 per annum. That is way in excess of what it costs to maintain the motorways other Senators mentioned earlier. I hope the cost base is being addressed, despite the tradition of what I would see as a total capture of the Department by CIE. That is the spirit in which I put forward the amendments. As William Attley found in a report on behalf of one of the previous Governments, there is a strong tradition of engineer dominance rather than customer service in projects in this company. That must be addressed as well.