Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Ó Murchú, Mullins, Barrett, Reilly, Kelly, O'Neill and White for their contributions, for the way they have approached what the Government and I are seeking to do, and for the observations they have made on the legislation. I will respond to the common themes of their contributions before turning to specific issues they raised.

I acknowledge the contribution Senator White's husband made as chairman of the Railway Procurement Agency and the work he did with the Industrial Development Authority. She acknowledge the success of the Luas. Approximately 30 million passengers are carried on light rail annually with the number increasing last year. We expect an additional 10 million passengers to be carried on the network when the Luas cross-city project is complete, not only because the new line will be provided but also because it will integrate with existing lines. which is important. That will present us with the opportunity to increase passenger numbers by almost one third. Works are taking place in Broombridge in my constituency and it is tremendous to see families stopping on the way to school to look at all the work taking place in an area through which rail lines used to pass. In many ways, we are going back to the future with these projects because we are recreating the transport infrastructure that was present in our city many decades ago. It is an exciting project, which is making good progress and I look forward to the opening of this line in 2017. I am particularly pleased that I was able to play a role in having the depot, which will be located adjacent to Broombridge station, named the Broombridge Hamilton station. Much of the equipment and carriages will be stored there. Sir Rowan Hamilton made a great mathematical breakthrough almost two hundred years ago at a bridge located near the depot and I look forward to us being able to commemorate that properly.

Senator White highlighted the value of public transport and pointed out that people feel good when they travel on the Luas. The reason for that is this is public transport done well. Another form of public transport that has been done well is that provided by our bus companies. Senators Barrett, Reilly and Mullins offered diverging views on this. Over recent days, I have commented publicly on the value I place on the role of Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann and the CIE group in totality. My words alone might not be sufficient for many but if they are not, people should look at the track record of the decisions I have made recently in respect of that organisation. Prior to Christmas, I invested €101 million in the fleets of the CIE group to strengthen the company's financial position and in acknowledgement that this was needed by employees and the companies' passengers. I have been at pains to stress that following a process, which I acknowledge will cause worry, in the coming years we will have a bus market that is significantly bigger than it is now. Within that market, Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann will do well and they are capable of doing even better. Many of my predecessors spoke about making the change I have proposed. We have reached this point and it has fallen to me to make it happen. The taxpayer is paying a huge amount to support public bus companies and the reason this change is being made is simply to ensure options are available to invest that money and make sure the best return is delivered on behalf of the taxpayer. Last year, these bus companies received €90 million in public service obligation funding.I aim to create an environment in which that funding can achieve even more for the taxpayer through a tendering process in which the public bus companies themselves will be competing.

Senator Reilly spoke about the fear that profitable routes might be, to use her phrase, cherry-picked by particular kinds of operators. That misses the point of what is going on. The routes being tendered out in this process are not commercial routes. We have commercial routes in our country, on which Bus Éireann and coach operators have been competing with each other every day for over 20 years. These are public service obligation routes, in which the taxpayer invests. We are not putting the market out to tender through this. We are putting out 10% of routes to achieve competitive tension. Senator Reilly also expressed her concern about the effect on working standards and living conditions, which I understand. However, we must remember this change is taking place inside a market that is already very highly regulated. Much of that regulation is economic in nature. I reiterate to the Seanad what I have already said publicly, most notably yesterday, namely, that I am committed to ensuring that the terms and conditions of employees who could be affected by this would be protected. We made this commitment through the Labour Relations Commission.

Senator White made the point that we need to come up with environments in which people are capable of delivering their best and in which efficiencies can be achieved. I strongly believe this change will deliver in this regard. Senator O'Neill posed a number of important questions in this regard. He noted the efficiency savings that are to be achieved and I acknowledge, as he did and as I did earlier, that it will be year three before we get to this point. That is because changes will have to be made to achieve the coherence we are seeking. That will cost money, but when those changes are made, I am confident that from year three onwards, savings will be delivered, which in turn can be returned to the taxpayer or used to deliver further services. While the efficiency savings do provide some of the rationale for doing this, Senator O'Neill said that if the NRA is a quango, it is a good quango. We are trying to get to a point where, in a country of our size, we have one organisation that has the tools, skills and expertise to manage particular kinds of infrastructure. That is what this project is about. Alongside that, it will give the people an organisation of sufficient scale for them to have opportunities to progress their own careers, develop their own skills and work on new projects and bigger things, which they might not have been able to do if these entities had stayed separate.

Senator Barrett touched on tendering. We have discussed the Aer Lingus and IAG matter before, so I will not go into it now, but he has commented on the many people who are encouraging me to hurry up. I will approach this matter carefully and spend the time required to ensure it is done right. That is what the House would expect me to do, not to mention the people of Ireland. The Senator made one point I agree with, namely, that we do not need to build new projects every year. I want to relate that to a point Senator Ó Murchú made and which Senators from all sides of the House have made to me in the Seanad and privately. I agree with his point and in the report I published on the Department's website yesterday on the strategic framework for investment in land transport, I made the point that we need to see the amount of funding available to land transport increase incrementally all the time. However, it is my contention that the main place that additional money needs to be spent is in maintaining what we have. My first priority in that regard is the local and regional road network the Senator has described. That local and regional road network constitutes approximately 93% of the roads in our country. I am very conscious from points that Senators have made and from doing my job across the breadth of our country that the parts of our transport infrastructure that are under the most pressure are our local and regional roads. When Senator Ó Murchú was framing his point around potholes, he spoke about the damage they can do. He is correct. Potholes and the deterioration of the surfaces of our local and regional roads provide a pressing challenge for this Department and for our local authorities. Over time, we need to respond to that challenge and invest in addressing it. Senator Barrett also made a point about the variety of projects out there. He said that we do not need advocacy, but rather analysis. I am replete with advocates and am glad to say I am also replete with analysts in my own Department and the National Transport Authority to rise to the point he has made. That is why, in respect of the transport option for the north side of the city, I ask the National Transport Authority to consider, on a like-for-like basis, what is the best way of responding to the transport challenge our city faces. While I am certain that when I make a recommendation, many people will still disagree, I would rather do that on the basis of analysis and conclusions that I will stand over than on the basis of either my personal views or the views of others.

Senator Kelly raised two points with me. I am sorry if I have not responded directly to him on those points, because he has raised them with me in the Seanad before. Regarding his request for an amnesty for the over-70s, I am sorry to disappoint him but amnesties are not the way to go in terms of addressing needs like this. We continue to have a pressing need to ensure the training is in place and the skills are in place among all those who hold driving licences, regardless of age. I would be concerned that any kind of amnesty would get around a very pressing need. Regarding insurance for young drivers, I take the Senator's point that it is very expensive for young drivers to get insurance for the first time. I want to see that as drivers gain experience on the roads, the insurance premiums they face reflect this level of experience. If they have not had any accidents and, if they have no, or few, penalty points, that should be reflected in the insurance premiums they face. I believe that happens in some cases, but I take the Senator's point about seeing if there is anything that could be looked at to encourage that to happen more. I accept that the cost of insurance is a growing concern for many people.

I have already addressed Senator Reilly's comments on my views on the tendering of bus services.With regard to her point on capital investment I have already touched on this.

I thank Senator Mullins for his points on tendering. We would have found ourselves in a different place if the Rail Procurement Agency had decentralised but it was not to be and will not happen now. It will be based on Parkgate Street. I am aware of the various points made by the Senator on what is happening and the discussion taking place on the transport options for Galway city. It is very much a matter for the local authorities in Galway to recommend a particular route. I hope that in the process of so doing it will recognise many of the concerns people have and I hope they will be alleviated. In terms of new light rail options, for the time being we will have our work cut out for us paying for the light rail options we have in Dublin and maintaining the hard rail network throughout the country. I suggest a transport priority we could deliver, which would make a big difference to many people, is making progress on the funding and quality of our local and regional roads which are of concern to many of the Senator's constituents and many local authority members throughout the country.

I have touched on the points made by Senator Ó Murchú on local and regional roads. I share his views on quangos. Sometimes I feel the word "quango", which I have used myself in the past, may be pejorative to those working in the agencies. These agencies were created to do work which was deemed valuable at the time by either the Government or society. Just because a quango or organisation is dissolved or integrated into another body it does not mean the work does not need to be done. It does need to be done, but by fewer people operating in smaller organisations.

The way our public servants have responded to do far more with less is to their credit. I heard Senator White touch on the levels of inefficiency we hear spoken about every day, which do exist as they do in the private sector; I have worked in both. We continue to face many challenges, which I have acknowledged and stated they exist, regarding work practices and the changes we need to make in how we deliver public services. I am in the middle of such an issue with regard to the tendering of bus routes. We must also acknowledge the huge work our public servants have done in responding to great challenges at a time when far less was available to them. The NRA and the RPA have played a role in this. The Labour Relations Commission is already playing a role in dealing with matters that are sensitive to employees in both companies.

Senator Ó Murchú indicated the savings this might lead to may be in the ballpark of €300 million; oh, but that they could be. We estimate they will be approximately €3 million to €4 million. I regretfully disappoint the Senator and I do so genuinely because I would be even happier than him if it were so. I may have got my words wrong or the Senator may have misunderstood me as I was speaking. I agree with him that as the savings are delivered and as more money becomes available, local and regional roads are very important candidates for it. While these savings of €3 million to €4 million form part of the rationale they are not all of it. The broader background to this is that for economy of our size and for transport infrastructure of the scale we have and which we are likely to have in future it is very appropriate that we have a single body, and that within this single body we look for further efficiencies and give opportunities to all staff to develop their skills and careers and have the opportunity to work on new projects, and by doing so deliver what will be contained in the title of the new body, which is transport infrastructure for Ireland.