Seanad debates
Tuesday, 11 October 2005
Clare Street Traffic Management Initiative: Statements.
5:00 pm
Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the opportunity to address the Seanad on the Clare Street initiative, CSI. I thank Senators for raising this matter in the context of my new initiative and the Government's ongoing commitment to an efficient and sustainable transportation system for Dublin and the greater Dublin area. The issue of transport and mobility management is not only an important and interesting question, but one of day-to-day practical concern to all of us, particularly public representatives debating in the Seanad at the heart of our capital city.
There have been obvious and substantial improvements in Irish social and economic life since the 1990s, especially over the past eight years. We have seen increases in population and employment, in the number of houses being built, in car ownership and in personal wealth. All of these changes have a direct impact on our transport needs.
I confirm to the House that the Government places a considerable emphasis on ensuring that our transport systems can cope with increasing demands. In particular, the Government's ten year transport investment framework will identify the investment and outline the measures that are required to further develop all elements of national transport infrastructure. This means addressing existing bottlenecks and capacity constraints, enhancing quality, optimising the use of the network and making prudent advance provision for future economic growth.
I strongly believe we must develop a new model of co-operation for our capital and in doing so, we need to ensure we are grounded in our thinking. We need to move up the value added chain in our transport delivery. We need to collaborate, co-ordinate and integrate in an intelligent fashion in order to maximise the potential and foster new innovations in the way transport providers operate. We have heard many times about the benefits of reduced traffic congestion, reduced pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, improved health and safety, more balanced regional development and social justice. However, we must recognise that Government action alone will not solve all our transport problems.
I place on record my commitment to ensuring that a broadly based, consultative and innovative approach is taken to provide an efficient and sustainable transportation infrastructure for the people, communities and social and economic partners of the greater Dublin area. This approach is the starting point for any discussion on the future of transportation in the greater Dublin area. That is the basis on which I pulled the CSI group together and I am delighted I got unanimous support when I put the question to the group for the new charter to be adopted.
As Senators will be aware, members of my new initiative, referred to as the Clare Street initiative — the reason for the name is because that is where much of the homework took place — have been drawn together at my request to work together to brainstorm and drive forward innovative and, I emphasise, practical proposals for tackling traffic problems in Dublin. Success against congestion requires the efforts not only of one organisation, it is a problem that must be attacked on a number of fronts. It also requires co-operation between transportation agencies, businesses and the public. Since we are all affected by congestion, it is important we all work together and listen to each other in addressing the congestion problem.
The charter, adopted by steering group of the CSI at its meeting in Clontarf Castle on 5 October last, lays down the working framework for the initiative. The participants agreed that the purpose of the CSI will be to progress the effective implementation of traffic management and related measures in the greater Dublin area. The focus of the Clare Street initiative will be on measures which have the capacity to make a material difference, large or small; measures which are capable of delivering rapid results; and measures that might not otherwise attract high priority for implementation.
In particular, I want to develop and carry forward projects that will contribute towards more effective traffic management. While it is difficult to predict the future, we will all agree one thing that can be stated with assurance, namely, unless more transport options and solutions are available, future commuters will make longer trips at slower speeds. With this in mind, the CSI will focus on the development of innovative measures that have the capacity to make improvements on the ground quickly.
The CSI provides the opportunity for experimentation and small-scale field testing of practical measures, for the transfer of know-how based on best practice and for the implementation of innovative concepts and emerging technologies. Also, it permits the business sector to assist in a practical way by providing relevant expertise and will bring together business and public bodies to work on shared challenges.
The CSI is intended to complement and bring added value to the major transport investments under way or planned for the greater Dublin area. It will focus on smaller scale traffic management and related initiatives rather than large scale infrastructural or other capital investment projects. It will also focus on the practical delivery of projects rather than advocating or opposing particular projects. Projects under the CSI will be funded from the resources of implementing agencies, as appropriate, and, where necessary, from my Department.
Participation in the CSI is on a personal basis rather than as a representative of any agency, company or interest. Members, only some of whom belong to planning and transportation agencies, do not represent any organisation within the CSI forum. Rather, the participants bring their own views and experience to the table. Each member of the steering group brings a specific dimension of expertise and experience to bear on the remit of the CSI. I would like to record my appreciation of, and thanks to, the members of the steering group who not only met and agreed the new charter in Clontarf Castle on 5 October last but who also worked with me over the past number of months, on a regular basis, to bring this to fruition.
The participants are finalising a manageable short list of projects to be taken forward in each of the first two years. Project sponsors for each project have yet to be finalised. It will be the role of the CSI to promote and support the implementation of projects but not in any way to substitute itself for existing agencies or to pre-empt their functions.
The CSI charter, adopted and agreed in Clontarf Castle at its inaugural meeting on 5 October last, makes it clear that the initiative will work with existing agencies and within existing governance structures and that it will be the responsibility of the relevant statutory or other agencies to decide whether or not to proceed with projects suggested by the initiative. Once the agency has decided to implement a project, the agency and the project sponsor will provide a brief report identifying how and within what timeframe it is proposed to implement the project.
The CSI, through the relevant project sponsor, will monitor progress on projects and there will be a reporting structure on progress to the steering group. Having considered the regular reports of sponsors, the group will decide whether to keep the project on its action list. Clearly, projects will need to be defined in terms of their potential for practical implementation and how they can be judged a success or failure.
The model for this initiative is the Inzeller Kreis initiative, jointly established by the mayor of Munich and BMW Company back in 1995. The initiative forged a new partnership between the public and the private sectors in the Munich region. In particular, the Munich initiative brought together representatives of local government and business in Munich to identify and promote the implementation of practical measures to address transportation problems. I hope we can learn lessons from the Munich initiative and other traffic models that Members may believe warrant consideration.
However, one is not always obliged to rely on models. We constantly learn more about the basic nature of congestion in terms of its trends, its impacts and what can be done about it. Accordingly, we are open to suggestions and ideas from as many sources and as many people as possible. Members will agree that anecdotal information from the public can often be useful in identifying the current locations and causes of major congestion problems. For this reason, I arranged for some members of the public who are not transport practitioners to give their views to the CSI on transport problems in Dublin and what they believed might be done to solve such problems.
For example, at the CSI's recent seminar on 5 October, five members of the public gave their viewpoints on aspects of transportation in Dublin. They were Louis Copeland, the well-known Dublin businessman; Clare Finnegan, a PhD student in the department of civil engineering in Trinity College, Dublin; Basil Goode, a hotelier operating in Dublin; Mary Prizeman, a retail store supervisor and housewife; and Joyce Ring, a full-time housewife.
All stakeholders have an interest in solving the congestion problem. Public transport companies are in the business of serving customers in the same manner as any private firm, except that the customers, that is, the public and other businesses, buy efficient and safe travel. The public, elected officials and businesses are more than simply consumers but are also stakeholders. Hence, these consumers should also examine their own decisions and policies to identify changes that can improve quality of life while recognising that transport companies cannot solve the problem by themselves.
A total of 37 projects were tabled by members of the CSI in advance of the seminar on 5 October 2005. Workshops were held to consider those projects in detail. I could go into great detail in respect of the work I put into the CSI. I approached a number of people whose presence would be appropriate around the table as well as including five members of the public who, as I mentioned, are not practitioners in the delivery of transport modes. I tried to get the mix right, as I did not want the practitioners to talk to themselves around a table. While one might ask why this has not been done before, I cannot answer such a question. For the first time I brought the relevant personnel together to foster a spirit of co-operation rather than of competition between them. I also wanted the seminar to be meaningful and fruitful, rather than a day in which a discussion would be held but which would require people to come back later to consider projects.
In that regard, we circulated pre-prepared templates to the group on which its members could include projects. This was the method used to arrive at the 37 projects. The templates included a number of items in respect of what was involved, the time period for implementation and the costs. In essence, it contained the relevant questions that one would expect in order to make a quick decision. The group then broke into workshops to consider the projects in greater detail. Each workshop subsequently presented its chosen projects to the plenary session whereupon they were considered and a short list of projects was identified. In some cases, individual projects were amalgamated.
However, the list of projects has not yet been finalised, as those who have been identified as sponsors of individual projects must confirm their acceptance of such sponsorship. I will clarify what I mean by sponsorship. If a proposal was made, such as putting an incentive in place to use public transport modes outside peak travel time, I thought it would be appropriate for it to have a suitable sponsor with his or her finger on the pulse, who would ensure it would go through the relevant stages and who might be in a position to help it do so.
In other words, we have requested people to take on sponsorship of projects to ensure they go through the relevant steps. In certain cases, I await confirmation of people's acceptance of such a sponsorship role.
Agencies identified as implementers of individual projects must formally accept responsibility for them before the list of projects can be formally announced. We must ensure the requested agency will be prepared to take on the project. However, given the group of people involved, the amount of effort, time and energy put into the initiative and the manner in which projects have been identified, I do not envisage difficulties from either sponsors or agencies.
In conclusion, I should point out that the CSI will not, of itself, solve all the traffic problems of Dublin. In the same way that members of the group will be required to work together to tackle traffic problems in Dublin, we will also look to other organisations to play their part. Success against congestion requires the efforts of more than one organisation and is a problem that must be attacked on a number of fronts. It also requires co-operation between transportation agencies, businesses and the public. Since we are all affected by congestion, it is important we all work together to address the congestion problem.
I am confident the future of the CSI is secure as a vital element of planning a sustainable transportation network in the greater Dublin area. I hope my comments have been helpful to the House.
Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, to the House. Belatedly, I congratulate him on his initiative, in that he is attempting to do something for transport in Dublin. However, the two senior Ministers who preceded him have failed and did little. While the Minister of State is trying to do something about the transport issue in Dublin, he does not hold the purse strings and his hands are tied.
The Minister of State's initiative is not the first time that such an initiative has taken place. In 1998, former Deputy John Bruton and Deputy Olivia Mitchell held a conference on transport in Dublin. All the agencies referred to by the Minister of State were present. In 2003, as Fine Gael's spokesperson on transport, Deputy Naughten held another conference on the issue in Citywest at which the various organisations were also present. Several different issues emerged from those conferences.
The time for talking is over and done with. Everyone knows what is wrong. One does not need any more conferences to know what is wrong with transport in Dublin and with the congestion occurring on a daily basis in the city. Even the recent by-elections in Meath and Kildare threw up many different plans and remedies to solve Dublin's transport issues. However, it all comes down to funding. We could talk until the cows come home, but unless money is provided and unless the Department of Transport and the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, provide finance to put in place various solutions that have been proposed in reports over the last ten years, nothing will happen.
As the Minister of State's trip to Germany revealed, very few agencies were involved in the German initiative. Obviously, however, decisions were made and money was made available. The Minister of State has noted that park and ride facilities and other remedies were put in place. The various agencies here seek different things, all of which cost money. The Department of Transport should state that it will put in place park and ride facilities in various areas on the city's outskirts.
Opening up railway lines is another issue. For example, the railway service between Dublin and Westport has broken down four times in the past six weeks, which would put anyone off the idea of travelling by train to and from the west. I do not know what the Department of Transport is doing on this matter.
When the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, was the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, he established strategic policy committees, SPCs. Every local authority had an SPC on transport and I am sure these SPCs have something to say or are they redundant now that the Minister of State has put this initiative in place? The Dublin Regional Authority is also an authority on transport but no comment from it is visible here. The Fine Gael position on the Dublin transportation issue is one the Minister of State should take up and run with.
Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The creation of a single Dublin transport authority. I read through the list of agencies submitted by the Minister of State but how can 21 different agencies run the city's transportation system? After all the discussions that have taken place we know what is wrong but decisions must be taken. The Dublin transport initiative was put forward by Deputy Naughten when he was the Fine Gael spokesperson on transport and the necessity to establish a Dublin transport authority remains our position.
On traffic management, Dublin needs a traffic corps. We have all witnessed the transport system working quite well during busy rush hours at Christmas when a traffic corps is in place around the city. Why is this so? Why can it not work on a daily basis? These moves would require money and it is only a matter of investing the money in the projects. The Minister of State has suggested many fine ideas but unless money is invested in many of them, the Government will hopefully be on its way out in 12 months time.
Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator seems to have inside information.
Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The people are waiting for a change of Government as they know our plans for a Dublin transport authority and a traffic management system, including a traffic corps for Dublin. These are basics that will require money. When the recent Meath by-election was contested people sought a train service from Navan to Drogheda and Dublin. This would require funding but would relieve much entry traffic and traffic on the roads and streets of Dublin. Many other people were disturbed by the Taoiseach's remarks concerning supertrucks. He said that people who want to do business in this country must conform to our modes of transport.
Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We should have a debate on the matter of supertrucks. If they are banned from our roads and cannot be used in the Dublin Port tunnel, they must go through the streets of Dublin. If they are to be banned, what will be the position on lorries with trailers attached?
Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The supertruck will bring goods to the country 20% more cheaply. People have spoken about abolishing the groceries order to reduce the cost of goods in Ireland. Transport is a significant issue here. We are on Europe's periphery and getting goods to and from the market is very expensive. The Government is split on the supertruck issue. The PDs have one position while Fianna Fáil has another. However, if supertrucks are not allowed in Ireland, I can foresee a situation of trucks with trailers developing, a combination that will be much more dangerous on Dublin's streets than the supertruck. This is an area we should revisit and have a reasoned debate on. The Taoiseach's comments were not helpful in this regard.
Cyprian Brady (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Taoiseach must be doing something right.
Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
While I compliment the Minister of State on his initiative and the work he is trying to do while his hands are tied, this matter depends on funding. The Government knows what is required better than the people who were at that meeting. Decisions on funding need to be made urgently. John Bruton knew in 1998 what was required. I am sure the Department of Transport knows exactly what is needed, as we all do. We have a deficit of funding in the city for park and ride facilities, railway stations, the opening of railway lines to the likes of Navan and so forth. From our point of view, the remedy would be a Dublin transport authority and traffic management or a traffic corps for the city.
6:00 pm
Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State to the House and compliment him on the Government's latest effort to resolve what is a very serious issue in Dublin city. The Minister of State has taken a fresh and detailed approach to the issue and carried out a considerable amount of work behind the scenes before launching the initiative. It is refreshing to know that, when he held the meeting, he was in a position to move on a significant number of the issues and gauge early winds on this initiative, which is critically important. His approach allows for the possibility of moving smaller individual projects ahead at a much faster rate rather than depending on the big bang or large project approach, which can often lose the interest or enthusiasm of people involved. However, the Minister of State is dividing the initiative into 34 or 36 different elements and there is an opportunity to win on a number of levels. There is also the opportunity to spread the elements over different sponsor groups and ensure they are finalised.
It is important to examine the problem in the city on a street by street basis to ensure best use of financial and infrastructural resources. By this stage, infrastructural resource means the width of streets, parking availability, proximity to public transport whether it is bus, Luas or train, and trying to put all of it together in a way that maps the needs of the people who use the city on a daily basis. While large scale projects such as the port tunnel, Luas, the extension of DART services, the upgrade of the intercity trains and the extension of commuter train services are excellent in terms of what they deliver, they tend to examine matters on a macro level. Now, the Minister of State is examining the facilities and resources present and ensuring we are sweating the asset, as the old adage goes, to its greatest possible use. It is finite in terms of how far it can be taken and the extent to which improvements can be made but the Minister of State is taking the right approach.
I disagree with Senator Paddy Burke that this issue is all about money and we may one day debate how the Opposition would raise the money he believes is needed, be it via increased taxes or whatever. How we use and manage our resources is what we should concentrate on and I am sure the Minister of State's group will do so.
Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is dependent on expected figures rather than costs over or under expectations.
Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That would certainly help. However, all sides have much history in terms of how that matter was mismanaged. We could go through them.
Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is an opportunity for experimentation in some of the small scale projects and testing out new ideas, some of which would come from other countries. We are not leaders in terms of city planning and city transport planning and there is much to be learned, as the Minister of State knows. I know the Oireachtas transport committee continues to do this through visits to cities that are ahead of the curve on this issue. There is an opportunity to use new technologies. I saw a recent example of new technology in my own county on the bridge at Killaloe on the border between counties Clare and Tipperary — many Members know of it. For years, trucks became caught on the bridge because of its width and ended up stalling traffic. A very sophisticated traffic light management system is being installed. It is only an interim solution and we would obviously like to see the bridge widened or a new bridge constructed, which has been proposed. The latest technologies in traffic lights systems can greatly alleviate current problems and ensure that there is a greater movement of traffic and that unnecessary delays, which are associated with older technologies, are avoided.
It is critically important for the Minister for State to examine integrated transport systems in other countries. This needs to be examined in terms of the entire public transport network and ensuring that integration is present. There are many examples of this around Europe.
Education is also a vital component of solutions for the future. The ESB has taught the public about and promoted the idea of conservation and the efficient use of electricity for many years. The ESB suggests that electricity is a finite resource in terms of our ability to generate it. We could also use the same educational approach in terms of the conservation of the use of our road network. When it gets to the current level of congestion in our cities, we must educate people. The Minister of State already spoke about some of these initiatives regarding when people use roads and possibly encouraging people to use them at off-peak times for non-essential travel.
The Minister of State's role in dealing with congestion in the greater Dublin area is very worthy and needs to be supported. However, congestion occurs in regional cities and towns, which is also worth looking at. I hope the Government continues to address this issue in the future. It has done so in County Clare with the Ennis bypass and similar developments have occurred in County Sligo and other areas and we wish to see these continue. The tunnel being constructed under the River Shannon that will connect counties Limerick and Clare will be important and immensely beneficial to the people in these two counties and the future growth of Shannon Airport when it comes into play. Hopefully, this will help to overcome some of the drop in passenger numbers about which we are concerned which will result from the proposed changes in the Ireland-US bilateral agreement. I wish to put on record the concern felt by people in County Clare about reports that the Department of Transport is actively pursuing a policy of ending the current dual gateway policy with the US. It appears that this policy is being driven by a desire to facilitate Aer Lingus's expansion, which will create a very difficult trading environment for Shannon Airport. This again tends to centralise services on the east coast, which is unhelpful and unnecessary given the growth of the east coast and traffic congestion there. If we could continue with Government policies that deliver balanced regional development and an infrastructure outside Dublin, it may also help overcome some of the congestion in Dublin. The tell-tale signs are already there.
The Shannon Airport Authority is promoting a policy of outsourcing to reduce its costs and is claiming that it is forced to do this. While cost reduction is essential for the future viability of any project or operation, outsourcing can only lead to the creation of yellow pack jobs which will reduce the quality of life and social circumstances of those employed by the airport and those living in the region. Why is this being done? I suppose the reason is to boost the profits of Ryanair, which will hold Shannon Airport to ransom if it becomes the dominant player — I have no doubt it will become the dominant player if the dual gateway policy is dropped. These are the kinds of measures that go over and above what the Minister of State spoke about in terms of alleviating traffic congestion on the east coast, particularly in Dublin. Continuing to promote balanced regional development and the growth of centres in line with the national spatial strategy will also have an effect and help alleviate the problem. This situation is another example of corporate greed, which seeks through outsourcing to increase profits by forcing workers to take less pay for doing more work. We have witnessed a similar situation with Irish Ferries.
The Government needs to examine in other areas how the economic sectors are managed to ensure that a spread of population and economic growth will also help to alleviate some of the problems that have bedevilled Dublin in terms of the growth in the numbers of people living and working there and increased congestion, which is now reaching unacceptable levels. This initiative, which goes into the minute detail of the issue, is very welcome but there is a wider solution which we have known about for some time. It is a way of dealing with the west of Ireland and what the Government has already begun through decentralisation, which will also be very beneficial in the future and help redress the balance and address the congestion issues in Dublin and on the east coast.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Frank Fahey, to the House. I note that the Minister of State at the Depart-ment of Transport, Deputy Callely, was forced to leave this House temporarily to address another transport matter in Dáil Éireann but has indicated that he will return and address as many of the points as he can, even those raised during his absence.
I welcome this imaginative initiative. I understand the competition that exists between the different political parties with regard to initiatives but I think this initiative is slightly different. I like the fact that it includes the small person, anecdotal evidence and people's actual driving experience. When I look at the management of traffic in Dublin, I wonder sometimes if any of the people responsible for it actually drive around the city. The Minister of State has invited anecdotal evidence so I will talk about my experience of driving into Dublin from County Wicklow because it was illustrative of certain problems we all confront.
It would be useful if the Minister of State came in at this point because the initiative has not taken a final shape. He is giving us an idea of what is happening, the participants and the kind of programme he envisages but we still have the opportunity to affect it through debate in this House, which is a very useful and productive political exercise, and I look forward to the Minister of State's return to the House. This initiative has been widely welcomed. I received an e-mail from Dr. Margaret O'Mahony, who is head of the department of civil and structural engineering at Trinity College, Dublin, and who was involved in the initiative. She wrote that she welcomed the initiative quite strongly because she regards it as the start of a process to examine and implement strategies of relatively low cost. She wrote that the focus of the initiative is at transport user level, both for road and public transport users. She explains in further detail why she thinks the initiative is particularly useful.
In his speech, the Minister of State spoke about his visit to Munich in Germany, which I would be interested in learning more about. I understand the Minister of State was told by Dr. Manfred Rothkopf of the Munich and Upper Bavaria Chamber of Commerce and Industry that ten years ago, the traffic congestion in Munich was at the same level it is currently in Dublin yet the city managed to overcome it. The principle axis of this recovery, although it is not stated, was public transport and an underground metro system. The one thing that the Minister of State did not mention was a solid commitment to a metro system, which is the only measure that will resolve Dublin's traffic problems. It is inexcusable that we have not supported the Minister of State because I know he is a favour of a metro; it is obvious when one reads the newspapers. This Government should behave imaginatively and endorse the metro. It is not possible to say today as people did ten, 15 or 20 years that there is no money for a metro when Ireland is dripping with money. The money that was wasted on computer systems could have been used on a metro. Over €1 billion in unanticipated tax revenues is a nice windfall that could be used on a metro and would be very cost-beneficial. We would get a good return from our investment.
The Minister of State seemed to invite anecdotal evidence so I will share the experience I had today. I travelled from County Wicklow and I do not know how, but I managed to get on the M50. I had a remarkably smooth journey, and it was absolutely terrific. It was the type of experience one would imagine on an autobahn in Germany until I reached the canal where there were roadworks. One then shared the road with the Luas and traffic was reduced to one lane. I turned across in Goldenbridge and was in a queue for 15 minutes because the traffic was inappropriately managed. Almost every driver except me wanted to turn right but there was no feeder light to allow them to do so. Every time the traffic light changed, only one car, if any, managed to escape. That was unnecessary congestion.
My temper was not improved when I diverted and arrived at the top of Eccles Street to find the Mater Hospital disgorging what I assume were rural visitors, and it was impossible to move. I was completely stuck. There was no attempt to manage the situation of all of these people who naturally want to visit their relatives in hospital. This gummed up the traffic and there was no movement whatsoever. An imaginative solution is required for this, perhaps a lollypop person, I do not know. In Parnell Street an unusual measure has been taken, whereby a commercial company has been facilitated with its own traffic light. The Ilac Centre has a traffic light all to itself. We must examine all of these matters.
The issue of cycle lanes was not referred to in the Minister of State's speech and is one we should examine. Earlier we discussed the tragic situation in Donegal where a number of young people were killed. I did not agree with the analysis of my colleague who mentioned heavy goods vehicles. That is not relevant. All of these weekend accidents are similar and involve quite a large number of young people in one vehicle, in the early hours of Sunday morning, travelling home from a social event. Those are the common factors. No heavy goods vehicle was involved.
A tremendous increase in fatalities has occurred. Up to 11 a.m. today, 275 collisions and 303 deaths had occurred this year. I will not analyse these figures in detail because it is not directly relevant to this evening's debate. However, only 260 collisions and 295 deaths occurred during all of 2004. We still have a few months left in 2005 and we have already surpassed that. I introduce this point because of the notion of safety. I used to cycle quite a lot but I would be terrified to do so now. It is impossible because of SUVs, which is another issue to be examined. As a result of research done by Trinity College, we know they are more dangerous than other vehicles. A pedestrian hit by an SUV is twice as likely to be killed. There is also the roll-over syndrome that has been unearthed through research in the United States. These vehicles are not merely gas guzzlers, they are dangerous monsters on the road.
For this reason, I would have liked to have involved the lobby group representing cyclists in Dublin, the Dublin Cycling Campaign, in the consultations. Perhaps it is not too late to involve it. I know it attempted to contact the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen. Its representatives wrote to the Minister on 1 February 2005, 7 March 2005 and 30 March 2005 to request a meeting but did not even get a reply. On 20 April the group had a letter published in The Irish Times. I also have experience of the fact that sometimes if one wants to get a reply from a politician, one writes to The Irish Times and one receives a quick reply if the letter is published, but one does not always get a reply from the office. This correspondence continued for some time and eventually an e-mail was sent. There seems to be a reluctance to involve the Dublin Cycling Campaign but it should be involved. If we can get more people onto bicycles and out of cars that will certainly help, but only marginally. The main issue is the metro.
Another thought has struck me on my experience today. The M50, which is an orbital road, is great. When I got closer to the city I hit the South Circular Road, a previous attempt at a ring road. I am astonished to hear in the Minister of State's speech that the greater Dublin area now includes Kildare, Wicklow and Meath.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is huge. The problem is that we will build orbital roads further and further out instead of building the one thing that will solve the traffic problem, which is the metro. We all know this and I applaud the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, for sticking to his guns.
I will make some final points. I understand the Minister of State is considering all types of imaginative solutions, such as allowing people who pool car space and have three or more people in the car to use bus lanes. That costs nothing. It is a small measure but it could be effective. I do not know if the mechanics are possible to enable lights change to green from red late in the evening if there is no traffic coming from the opposite direction. I do not presume the technology must exist or it would not have been mentioned.
Mr. Paddy Power — not the bookmaker — has made a rather curious suggestion.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I know that but this is not the Mr. Paddy Power who is a close friend of mine and the Cathaoirleach. This is an inventor from Galway who has a company called EasyFlow. His idea is to have roads that do not cross, but which merge and demerge. He believes he could institute such a system in Dublin for approximately €3 million. I do not have the technical proficiency or expertise to examine this. Perhaps this type of idea comes from what the Americans call left field and could help to reduce the traffic problems in Dublin. I thank the Cathaoirleach for his indulgence.
Tom Morrissey (Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is little in this initiative with which anybody could disagree. However, I will go further and state that since I became a public representative in the early 1990s I understood the Dublin Transportation Office, DTO, existed and we had to bow and genuflect to it. Nothing would happen in Dublin or the region without having the nod and wink and agreement of the DTO and that is how I understand the situation to be today. On examining what the Minister of State is attempting to challenge and implement, one finds he states it is to promote the greater use of public transport, particularly by improving its performance and increasing its attractiveness.
There is a simple initiative that will never get as far as the Clare Street initiative because it will not get through the Department of Finance. I raised the issue of the travel saver pass on numerous occasions in this House. It has been available since 1997 through salary sacrifice but only through employers. I have discussed extending this scheme with the Minister for Finance and the previous incumbent of that office. The most recent letter I received in August told me to get lost and that this would not be done. The reasons given were amazing, and included that if the ticket was made more widely available in the manner I suggested, it would increase the workload of local area offices of the Revenue Commissioners. What rubbish, and I call it rubbish for one reason. A few years ago the bin tax was introduced in Dublin and every householder is entitled to claim tax relief on it. It was not mentioned at the time that it could not be introduced because it would increase the workload of revenue offices. Instead it is primarily targeted at Government offices.
Some buses that run into the city centre at peak time are empty while cars come to the city with only one person in them. I challenge anyone here to state how many motorists in the city know a travel saver pass exists. Why is it not widely advertised? The only question the Department of Finance asks of Dublin Bus every year at budget time regarding how many of these tickets were bought is how much God-damn money it has spent advertising it. It does not want it advertised because, as the letter to me stated, it would be a revenue loss to the Department of Finance. The situation is so ridiculous that the Department said if the ticket was more widely available and people could ring up the sales office of Dublin Bus to buy it for themselves, the ticket would be more expensive. It would not be more expensive because if people could buy it for themselves, they would be entitled to tax allowance at the rate of 22% or 40%, while at present employers' RSI of 10% comes on top of that. If people buy the ticket themselves there would not be any employers' RSI so each individual ticket would cost less.
In the meantime, buses and cars come to Dublin. Although a travel saver pass is in place the Department of Finance has its hands on the purse strings and will not allow the Department of Transport to go any further with it. This will never be part of the Clare Street initiative because the Minister for Finance has ordained it, yet one of the bold statements of the Clare Street initiative, which I fully endorse and support, promotes greater use of public transport.
I have lost count of the number of times Senator Terry and I raised the need for bus stops in our area when we were members of the county council. Four years later some of those bus stops have not yet been provided. They have not been provided because bus stops are dependent on their advertising revenue potential. A bus stop is only provided if Adshel or whatever other company providing the bus stop gets advertising on it. It is not dependent on how many people would use the bus stop; it relates to how many cars are passing by and to how many people would see the advertisement. This is how we are making public transport more attractive.
We have spent millions on our bus fleet. One does not often see a bus broken down compared to years ago. The buses provided under the national development plan are good clean ones. A total of 137 buses, carrying approximately 8,000 people, travel between Heuston Station and O'Connell Street between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m. every day. The Luas, located 100 yd. from there, carries 2,000 people, yet we all say how fantastic is the Luas. The Railway Safety Order gave it a thoroughfare with which nothing can compete. It can travel straight through to town. Although 8,000 people are carried by buses, the workhorses of Dublin that cover areas no other transport system will, every quality bus corridor, QBC, has to fight its way for every inch it gets, be it from traders or householders along the way.
We have invested significant amounts in public transport in terms of our bus fleet yet we have snarled it up by putting in place a QBC system that does not work. We have done nothing imaginative about our QBCs. Last year, €35 million was allocated in the budget for the further development of QBCs and to resolve some of the bottlenecks on existing QBCs. I have not seen one initiative in the Dublin 15 area on QBCs. A QBC in my estate is not monitored by the Dublin Transportation Office, DTO. The DTO monitors this QBC from the middle of the Navan Road. Every car in the country parks on it every morning. The QBC might as well not have been put there at all. On the one hand we put in place expensive traffic calming measures while on the other hand we do not even enforce them. I hope the five lay people referred to by the Minister will be public transport users and that one of them occasionally uses the commuter service from Clonsilla or any of the other areas on the outer regions of Dublin so he or she can see the problems faced by public transport users.
While I welcome today's announcement of €350 million for Kildare, it is long overdue and the interconnector is badly needed. If we are to solve Dublin's transport problems, we had better start connecting up what we have already. We must allow buses to travel more freely around the city and provide proper bus stops, bus shelters and a reliable train service which will attract people to use it. The proposed system for Kildare is fantastic but I regret that it will take four years to roll out. It can take up to two years to get a QBC into an area on an existing roadway, although it is basically a white line painted along a road. I foresee major public consultation difficulties because of the objections, representations and so on. Then when we do get QBCs, we do not even police them.
Many initiatives must be taken. The Dublin Transportation Office and Dublin City Council boast that the initiatives they have imposed in the city in recent years have resulted in 11% less car traffic between the two canals every day. They boast that they have pushed that car traffic onto the M50. Even though it is claimed that so much has been done, we are now looking at another initiative. As Senator Norris stated, any new initiative must be in the direction of public transport. One small initiative would demonstrate how serious the Department of Finance is in regard to this issue. I do not blame the Department of Transport as its hands are tied even regarding the implementation of the ten-year plan. The Department of Finance will dictate when and how that gets off the starting blocks.
The Department of Finance could demonstrate its willingness to allow every person in Dublin to leave his or her car at home and to get a travel saver pass so that he or she could get on the buses which have already been provided. Why would anybody get on a bus when the bus fleet is operating at something like 22% efficiency, travelling at something like 9 km or 13 km per hour? However, we have invested a significant amount of money in buses. I appeal to the Minister to examine the bus and train system and bus shelters so that people might leave their cars at home without getting drenched on the way to work.
Derek McDowell (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When looked at in isolation it is difficult to quibble with the Clare Street initiative. It appears to be getting people together, some of whom have an interest or expertise in transport matters, some of whom do not, and brainstorming to come up with up with little ideas as opposed to big ones. It does not have a budget; it does not have a plan. It does not have authority to carry through what it wants to do. Nonetheless, it is an inoffensive little idea and looked at in isolation I would not have a problem with it. The difficulty is that it is impossible to look at this in isolation; one must look at the bigger picture, which is one of incomprehensible stagnation in terms of decision making.
One of the first things the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, did when he came into office was to make his Valentine's Day revelations of 14 February last when he prematurely announced the ten-year transport initiative referred to by Senator Morrissey. A couple of days before the Minister was due to make a similar announcement, in his most indiscreet fashion, Deputy Callely, announced a whole range of projects costing no less than €6 billion over the next ten years. The trouble is that the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, did not have any authority to say it, not from his senior Minister, the Department of Finance or anybody else. A couple of days later the Minister, Deputy Cullen, got up on his hind legs in the Dáil and said that the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, was a bit previous, he would soon bring proposals to Government and we would all hear about the ten-year plan a few weeks later at the beginning of March. That was a spat between the Ministers and the Department at the beginning of February. It is now the start of October, eight months later, and we still do not have a ten year plan. Although we are eight years into the Government's tenure we still do not have any plan at all for public transport in Dublin. This applies to small matters and more significant ones. It applies to matters regarding which there is overwhelming consensus and others regarding which there is a real decision to be taken.
Let me refer to one of the small matters, namely, integrated ticketing, with which everybody agrees — at least I have not heard of anybody who disagrees with it. I live close to Killester DART station and if I want to go to Heuston Station, I should be able to take the DART at Killester Station and transfer to the Luas using the same ticket. This makes perfect sense. The Leader of this House, when she was Minister for Public Enterprise, announced she would achieve this very shortly after she took up that office in 1997. We heard more or less similar announcements from the Department in the succeeding four years. The then Minister told us she had made progress and had provided funding for a study on how integrated ticketing might be achieved. Ultimately, she told us it could be achieved using a smart card. When she went out of power there was suddenly a hiatus and we did not hear much about the issue for some time. We were then told a slightly different smart card would be used and that a different company might operate the system. The Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, told us at the end of 2004, shortly after he took up office, that we would have integrated ticketing. He said it was a wonderful idea which he had just conceived and that it would be in place substantively before the end of 2005. He said the Luas would introduce it earlier this year — it did something approximating it — and that Dublin Bus would introduce it towards the end of 2005. I do not know whether this is still the plan but I would love to know. No doubt the Minister of State will be in the House shortly, at which time he will tell us.
I am using integrated ticketing simply as an example of the paralysis affecting decision making and the incapacity to get anything done where there is a consensus regarding what should be done and where it is ascertained that it will not cost a fortune. We seem to be quite incapable of doing anything in such circumstances. I will be very interested to hear what the Minister of State has to say on this issue.
The Minister of State claims to have been inspired by the Munich experience when introducing the Clare Street initiative. This is well and good; I am sure he was. Munich is a city with which I happen to be familiar because I was one of the legion of Irish students who went there during the 1980s to study for the summer. I did so several times and therefore know something about how traffic initiatives developed there over the years. The circumstances that now obtain are such almost exclusively because of public transport, as Senator Morrissey rightly pointed out. When I first visited Munich in 1980, there were two U-Bahn lines, the U3 and U6 if my memory serves me well. There are now eight or ten. Over the succeeding quarter of a century, the city has built up a full structure of U-Bahn lines which serve virtually everybody, not only those living in the inner city but also those in the outer suburbs. This was done at a relatively reasonable cost.
Members of the Joint Committee on Transport visited Madrid a couple of years ago and it related a similar experience. It seems to be well within the ken and capacity of cities much the same size as Dublin to transform their public transport systems and put in place a comprehensive metro. However, we seem to be incapable of even making a decision in this regard. This is not to say we have not made a decision because the former Minister, Senator O'Rourke, said in 2000 that the Government was committed to providing a metro. Pretty much every reply to every parliamentary question on the issue since then involves a one-line answer by the relevant Minister to the effect that the Government is committed, under the programme for Government, to a metro for Dublin. We are not sure it is.
Iarnród Éireann produced plans in July 2004 which might sideline the metro. The Government seems to be totally incapable of making a decision. Will the Minister of State say what happened to the Iarnród Éireann plans of 2004, which included the plan for the interconnection between Heuston Station and Spencer Dock and the plan for the metro to Dublin Airport? These plans seem to have disappeared into some vast black hole in the Department of Transport which seems to sap the energy and initiative of all Ministers or anybody who gets involved with that Department.
I want to mention one or two issues that arose very briefly during the course of the discussion. Senator Paddy Burke mentioned supertrucks. I do not agree with him thereon but he reminded me of another issue on which we require a decision. The Government decided correctly not to increase the height of Dublin Port tunnel so as not to encourage supertrucks. They are just too big, they wreck our roads, they guzzle gas and petrol and their emissions are too high. I would have no problem if they disappeared. However, the Minister and his predecessors have been telling us for some years that they are to introduce regulations for heavy goods vehicles but they have not done so. There is a suspicion that the industry somehow "got to" the Department or Minister. Surely there can be no other good reason it should take so long to produce regulations. What is the position on the regulations? The Minister should bring some sort of certainty to the industry because, in fairness to it, it deserves it.
A plethora of different policies on buses has emerged from the Department in recent years. The policy which appears to have been favoured by the former Minister at the Department of Transport, Deputy Brennan, was bizarre in the extreme. He wanted to take a percentage of the fleet of Dublin Bus — probably a quarter — and franchise it out without providing for any increase in capacity within the city. He wanted to do so on the basis of some strange notion of competition, which I presume is based on the ideology he shares with Senator Morrissey. I do not know the current position and I presume the citizens of Dublin and the providers of public transport, including Dublin Bus, do not know either.
The truth is — this is good news — that the Dublin Bus fleet has improved considerably in recent years in terms of its reliability, the standard of provision and the comfort of the buses. Usage is increasing also, which is partly due to the creation of the quality bus corridors. I hope we have decided not to interfere with Dublin Bus. I have no problem with franchising out new routes, nor do I have a problem with competition on existing routes given that it operates in a planned and organised way, but the notion of simply franchising out part of the network and taking it from Dublin Bus in a way that would not increase capacity was always daft. The Minister of State should confirm that this notion is dead and buried.
I wish the Minister of State, Deputy Calelly, well with the Clare Street initiative. It seems his big ideas of Valentine's Day have given way to a series of small ideas, none of which he is willing to share with us today. I guess the initiative cannot do any harm but I, for one, am not holding my breath.
Diarmuid Wilson (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ahern, and his officials to the House. I confess that when the motion on the Clare Street initiative and traffic calming measures appeared on the Order Paper for today, I did not know what it was about. I therefore had to do some research. Having done so, I compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, on his initiative.
I understand the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, chaired a meeting on 5 October last in Clontarf Castle. The participants have already been mentioned by him and other speakers and I do not intend to mention them again. They agreed to establish what has become known as the Clare Street initiative. They agreed its purpose will be to progress the effective implementation of traffic management and related measures in the greater Dublin area. This area, as outlined by the Minister of State in his speech, includes all of Dublin city and county and counties Kildare, Meath and Wicklow.
The focus of the initiative will be on measures that will have the capacity to make a material difference, large or small, measures capable of delivering rapid results, and measures which might not otherwise attract high priority for implementation. The initiative will also provide the opportunity for experimentation and small-scale field testing of practical measures, the transfer of know-how based on best practice and the implementation of innovative concepts and emerging technologies.
I must confess I do not know Dublin well. I basically know how to get into it and out of it. The time that takes depends on the time one is coming in or going out. I am aware of many transport-related programmes conceived by the Government, some of which are completed and some of which are soon to be completed. The Luas, for instance, is an excellent system and has been a great success in transporting people throughout the city. The quality bus corridors, which have been mentioned by a number of speakers, are a great success, although my colleague Senator Morrissey seems to have a difficulty with the one that operates in his area. Perhaps, as a public representative, he should deal with that and not bring it to the House. People who have experience of these quality bus corridors argue that they should be expanded. I welcome the fact that €35 million has been allocated this year for the expansion of the quality bus corridors.
The DART system has doubled its number of carriages and this is to be welcomed. I understand, from people who use the DART, that it has become very effective. It is now a nicer form of transport for people to take in the mornings and evenings. I welcome today's announcement by Irish Rail that it is to invest €250 million on the Kildare line. However, I regret that it will take up to four years before that project is completed. Nonetheless, we have to go through the democratic process as regards proposed projects. I would also like to see this project expanded further down the line towards Mullingar, before long.
I understand that the Dublin Port tunnel will soon be finished. I note that Senator Paddy Burke and a number of other speakers have expressed concern over supertrucks not being able to use the port tunnel. I do not know enough about this to comment. However, I trust the Taoiseach, and if he says there is no need for them, then that is the position. I understand that an outer ring road is being planned for Dublin and will be included in the NRA's ten-year plan, which is to be published shortly.
My part of the country contributes to some of the congestion in the capital. The construction of the M3 is vitally important for people living in Cavan and Meath, commuting from towns such as Virginia, Kells and Dunshaughlin. More than 3,000 people commute daily from Cavan alone, not to mention the other towns on the way. It is vitally important that this is completed without delay. I welcome that the Minister has given permission for the archaeological digs which so far have unearthed nothing of significance, I understand. In this regard I want to comment on the proposal for a park-and-ride system. Any vehicle travelling from Cavan to Dublin on the new M3 will have to pay two tolls. There is no difficulty with that. However, there are proposals for the provision of a park-and-ride facility for up to 1,500 cars on the outskirts of Dunshaughlin. That will also have to be paid for by the people who use it. Anyone using the road and paying tolls should not have to pay to use that facility. I urge the Minister to examine this.
I would urge the Minister and the Government to go full speed ahead with the rail link to Clonee and on to Navan. I am a realist and do not expect this within the next few years, but perhaps the NRA's next ten-year plan might mention that the line could perhaps go as far as Cavan. Cavan is an expanding town——
Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It will be a pipe-dream, like all the others.
Diarmuid Wilson (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
——and I want to mention that this evening, in the presence of the Minister of State. Cavan and Monaghan were identified in the national spatial strategy as hub towns. We very much welcome that, but these were the only two of the nine mentioned that have no rail links. That is worth bearing in mind.
I welcome the Clare Street initiative, which makes interesting reading. I commend the Minister of State on putting his team together and I wish them well.
Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Like Senator Wilson, I too, thought that the Clare Street initiative and traffic calming measures was about putting ramps on Clare Street, until my colleague, Senator Paddy Burke, told me what it was really about.
I cannot compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, on what is proposed here. The Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ahern, is very welcome. Coming from Cork as he does, I am sure he understands the problems we have in Dublin and does not envy us. I want to quote the Minister of State, Deputy Callely:
I want to place on the record my commitment to ensuring that a broadly based, consultative and innovative approach is taken to provide an efficient and sustainable transportation infrastructure for the people, communities, social and economic partners of the greater Dublin area.
That is very good. We heard something along those lines on the first day the Government was formed. I want, however, to bring the next sentence to the House's attention: "I believe that this approach is the starting point for any discussion on the future of transportation in the greater Dublin area."
I am expected to welcome the Clare Street initiative but there is no need for this initiative. I feel sorry for the people the Minister of State has invited to discuss this with him and I compliment them on giving of their time to do so. Do they realise that the plan is there already in the form of the Dublin Transportation Office's transport strategy A Platform for Change — 2000 to 2016? It just has to be implemented. This initiative has no teeth, whatsoever. It is an effort by the Minister of State to reinvent himself, or to boost his ego, and to deflect attention away from the work that has not been done by his Department.
The failure to do this work has resulted in the congestion and the gridlock to be seen in Dublin on a daily basis. The Minister of State wants to try to solve the congestion in Dublin and this is the starting point. Does the Minister of State believe we came down in the last shower? Does he believe the people of Dublin will thank him for this initiative? I think not, and it is foolish to consider that this will deceive the people. We knew what needed to be done years ago, as Senator Morrissey has outlined. It is absurd to be talking of a ten-year plan which still has to be published. I have heard Senator Morrissey many times, and I support him in much of what he has said. Where is the integrated ticketing? Where is the electronic real-time bus information system? It would not be of great assistance, indeed, to people at the bus stops, apart from telling them that the bus will not be along for another 20 minutes or so. Where are the car parks at the railway stations? Where are the park-and-ride facilities we talked about years ago? In the Fingal county development plan, park-and-ride facilities have been included for years and not one has been provided. It would really impact on congestion in Dublin if people on the outskirts could be transported to the city centre by buses in the way the Luas is now transporting people from the Red Cow roundabout. There is not a single park-and-ride facility, certainly in the Fingal area.
As regards rail services, I acknowledge some improvements have been made on the Connolly-Maynooth line. This cannot be further improved, however, because of lack of capacity at Connolly station. An area of Dublin 15 which has a population approaching 100,000 is gridlocked due to lack of investment in public transport. There are some quality bus corridors over short distances. The one referred by Senator Morrissey is perhaps 100 yd. long before reaching a bottleneck from which point the buses cannot proceed any further. The same applies to most bus corridors in Dublin. While I support them and agree they help users to reach their destination a little quicker, buses still crawl into town.
An Bord Pleanála consistently informs us that it approves planning applications on the basis of the availability of public transport. It may, for example, grant permission for development if a bus corridor is located nearby. Dublin has been over-developed without the provision of an appropriate level of infrastructure. The city needs development because people want to live in it but this development must be matched by infrastructure. While the Dublin Port tunnel will make a major difference on the quays, it will create chaos on the M50, already the largest car park in the country.
The Minister of State did not mention the proposal to introduce a dedicated traffic corps. Where is this simple initiative? Why has it not been implemented? A dedicated traffic corps should be introduced immediately but its members should not be gardaí. The Garda should be deployed to prevent crime on the street not to direct traffic.
The document, A Platform for Change, outlines what needs to be done in Dublin. I cannot understand how the Minister of State has the brass neck to come into the House and inform Senators that this report is the starting point for discussion on transportation in Dublin. The parties in Government have been in power for almost eight years. What have they delivered? This Government has done nothing but increase congestion and gridlock in Dublin, yet the House is still discussing A Platform for Change.
Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are discussing transport and the problem of congestion in Dublin. In light of the Minister of State's comments, I suggest the solution is to replace this Government with one which will deliver the necessary infrastructure.
Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There would be no congestion because nobody would be working.
7:00 pm
Cyprian Brady (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State and the Clare Street initiative he proposes. I am delighted he is as enthusiastic about this initiative as about previous measures with which he has been involved. If anybody has knowledge of the effect of traffic on local areas, it is the Minister of State. The manner in which the initiative has been compiled and the steering group involved in its delivery will ensure participation is comprehensive and the proposals remain realistic and achievable.
Of all the issues exercising people in my area, traffic probably ranks third on the list after health and crime. Transport issues, whether disc parking, cycle and bus lanes or speed ramps, affect the lives of everyone, from schoolchildren to pensioners. We must all use our transport infrastructure, whether to take a bus or travel by bike, on foot or in a car. Transport, therefore, has a profound impact on people's daily lives and this initiative, which proposes to micro-manage issues and address specific problems, will help to alleviate some of our transport problems.
In my area of Dublin, ramps, speeding, parking for residents and other transport issues create problems. For example, the significant increase in the number of small and large apartment complexes presents difficulties. In the 1980s and 1990s, when speed ramps were first introduced as a traffic calming measure, their purpose was to combat the major joyriding problem experienced in certain areas of the city. These ramps are now being used as a traffic calming measure to reduce speed but have become redundant because the sheer volume of traffic means one can no longer speed on the roads.
Senator Morrissey referred to the Dublin Transportation Office. I recall the widespread consultation process involving the public, business, local authorities and other relevant bodies which took place prior to the establishment of the office. Published in the early 1990s, its final report resulted in the Dublin transport initiative which produced a number of excellent concrete recommendations, including the introduction of bus and cycle lanes, the construction of a light rail system and improved public transport. However, some of the more important recommendations, such as the introduction of park and ride facilities and the construction of a metro, have not been implemented.
I fundamentally disagreed with the policy of excluding as much car traffic as possible from the city centre because the infrastructure required to support this approach was not provided. This policy decision, which is still in effect, was applied at the expense of areas adjacent to the city centre. It is obvious it has not worked because traffic is still a major problem for anyone seeking to cross the city. No steps were taken to link this wider approach with the policies of Dublin City Council, which continued to grant permission for the development of large car parks and apartment complexes in the city centre. The requirement that every apartment development have a certain ratio of car parking spaces to apartments, for example, did not link in to the policy of trying to exclude cars from the city centre.
While nobody can deny the considerable investment and improvement in public transport in recent years, these positive developments must be supported by other measures. The Luas is an example of an approach which works. I recall that the residents of certain areas in my constituency fought tooth and nail against proposals to build a light rail system. Public representatives for these areas did their constituents a major disservice in opposing Luas and causing the planned route to be changed to avoid Mount Brown and Inchicore. Driving through these areas the other day, I noted that businesses are folding or moving elsewhere.
The Clare Street initiative focuses on smaller-scale traffic management. Steps which may not seem significant in the overall context could have profound effects at local level. In recent months, for example, changes to two of the main arteries from the northside into the city centre, the Howth and Malahide roads, which have involved channelling traffic into one lane, have created major problems where there had been none previously. These problems are the direct result of a policy decision to prevent as many cars as possible from entering the city centre. It may be a small change overall but it has a major impact at local level.
While I accept that the introduction of a traffic corps was proposed, one must also consider recent successes such as the imminent opening of the Dublin Port tunnel. Senator Paddy Burke raised the issue of supertrucks. Between 9,000 and 10,000 trucks travel from Dublin Port through East Wall every day. We do not need to supersize them. This is not that big a country. Unfortunately, we cannot cope with these vehicles. I agree with the Taoiseach when he stated we do not need them.
Cyprian Brady (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
For a change, I will agree with him.
Cyprian Brady (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There are other suggestions such as the use of QBCs by cars with multiple occupancies and the co-ordination of school opening and closing times. All of these are local matters which can be looked at and that is where this initiative will be extremely important because that is where it will work.
Joe O'Toole (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As it happens, I also, surprisingly, agree with the Taoiseach on that issue. Having stood beside and having been overtaken by those huge cubist trucks, I am afraid of them on the road and I worry about what they do. Their slipstream is like that of a Boeing 747.
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, to the House. Having listened to the debate, he might in his response tell me what the Clare Street initiative is about.
Joe O'Toole (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I listened to Senator Morrissey, who tried to explain it. In fairness to him, he made a valiant effort. I would hate to put him on the same level but I think he is as confused as I am about what it might be.
The crucial aspect is that the Minister of State told the House earlier that it "will work with existing agencies and within existing governance structures and that it will be the responsibility of the relevant statutory or other agencies to decide whether or not to proceed with projects ...". What is new? The Clare Street initiative is just a new layer on top of what is already there. The Minister of State would be far better off bringing forward the urgent infrastructure Bill, which has been promised for a long time and which could save a great deal of time in other ways.
I wish to begin with two anecdotes for the Minister of State. On the northside of Dublin, the N2 comes straight down through Finglas. As the second of the main arteries of Dublin, it arrives at Harte's Corner where it becomes one lane and shares priority with another road coming from Ballymun. The Minister of State might say that next year the M2 will replace the N2 but that will only treble the problem because it will result in a motorway, rather than a national primary route, coming into one lane at Harte's Corner. The difference here is that there is no road off the N2. In the case of many other roads into the city traffic is filtered off in one way or another, going west or east, or south or north. The N2 has only one final destination, Glasnevin. There is no road off it. The N2 is not working.
My second anecdote relates to my visit to Auckland, which has a traffic congestion problem. Each day at noon a huge machine, which looks a little like a snow-plough, goes out along the main road into town and moves the median across one lane. Instead of there being three lanes into the city and one lane out, the machine facilitates the reverse.
Joe O'Toole (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is an excellent idea. It is no good to us, however, because the problem at the city end persists. Standing at Harte's Corner, one can see where the problem lies. The traffic coming into the city is not prioritised. Traffic should be prioritised until it reaches some place where it can disperse and that is not happening on the N2. I could give the Minister of State plenty more examples.
Earlier Senator Morrissey stated that the people who deal with this should be ones who travel on public transport. It is a fair point. It is difficult to do so. I came into the city by public transport this morning. I live on the N2. First, I had to decide what to do with my car because the bus passes a mile and a half from my house and there is no park and ride facility. I said this to the Minister of State a year and a half ago and he agreed one would be a good idea. He has done nothing. There are acres of space between the N2, the M50 and the new M2.
Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator should wait until I respond.
Joe O'Toole (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There are acres of space in Senator Morrissey's new constituency, where the Minister of State could also help him out by putting in a park and ride facility at the airport end.
There is the proposal, which also relates to Senator Morrissey's constituency, to extend the Metro to Swords, where one could provide a generous sized park and ride facility. Part of the problem with the airport is the result of cars going into it and that will be exacerbated next year when the port tunnel opens because all the trucks will go back up the M50. That will add to the difficulty.
We need what the Taoiseach suggested eight or nine months ago, an outer ring road. I also agree with him on this. Senator Morrissey also mentioned this. Why not just do it? It is clear that we need it. It is only a matter of where to route it, from Drogheda through Slane to Naas, or wherever. It is merely a matter of taking a look at the map. I could find four different places where it might go. There is plenty of land out there. One need only start buying it up and doing it. Why are we not moving on this? An outer ring road would take pressure off the M50 in a way that nothing else can, so that traffic travelling routes such as Cork to Belfast, Limerick to Belfast and Galway to Cork could turn off the Dublin road a long way outside the city. That is what we need to do.
There should be a park and ride facility at all of the main arteries into the city. There is none on the northside. There is none on the Blanchardstown road, there is none on the Navan Road, there is none on the Ashbourne Road and there is none on the airport road. Perhaps there is one in the Minister of State's constituency — I am not familiar with the coast road. I do not know of any park and ride facility on the Dublin northside.
How can it work? People manage through grace and favour. Many of the public houses on the northside will allow people park their cars there before flagging down a bus in the morning but that will not last much longer. It boils down to the fact that if there is a swift efficient service, people will use it. Such a service is not provided. Many of the problems are not as huge as we are making them out to be. Traffic priority in some places is the issue. Park and ride would be a significant issue, as would ensuring a bus service runs continually up until midnight.
The other issue involves the trains. I welcome this morning's proposal about Kildare. I spoke here in the presence of a Minister in a debate on the national development plan before it was published some seven years ago and we were told the Navan line would be open in no time. They have not even put a spade in the ground. These are the kinds of difficulties we need to look at. I would be delighted to be proven wrong on it but, as far as I know, there has been no work on it. I am sure Senator Wilson would be happy enough, in that we could then talk about extending it from Navan to Cavan. It all is there and it all can be done. There is no reason we cannot look at these matters.
I wholeheartedly agree with the points Senator Kitt made last Thursday, and other points made over the past week or so, about the need to put in place the western corridor. That relates to traffic outside of Dublin and hardly relates to the Clare Street Initiative. We do not know what the Clare Street Initiative is about. Perhaps the Minister of State might look upon me as a fourth class primary school child and explain in simple terms what it will do, who will do it, who will pay for it and how it will be done.
Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Senators for their contributions. I welcome the general positive reaction to my new initiative, the CSI.
Joe O'Toole (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State is listening with one ear.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State without interruption.
Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will not have time to respond to all the contributions but there are a few issues I wish to address. I again refer to the significant and unprecedented investment that has been made and continues to be made in transport infrastructure.
Senator Paddy Burke asked if funding was available for the Clare Street initiative. I am pleased to say it is. Many of the agencies have their funding and are satisfied that they will be able to accommodate some of the requests relating to the CSI.
The idea of CSI is that it is intended to complement and bring added value to the major transport investments that are currently under way or planned for the greater Dublin area. The CSI will focus on the smaller scale traffic management and related initiatives rather than the large scale infrastructural or other capital investment projects, on the understanding, of course, that we are doing our ten-year investment plan and we know what that entails.
I am delighted to hear Senator Norris endorse my desire to see the metro on the north side of the city, not just as far as Dublin Airport but north of Swords to open that catchment area. I know others in the Chamber want this development, which should include park and ride facilities.
The Clare Street initiative has been introduced to develop projects that will contribute towards more effective traffic management in the greater Dublin area. The initiative will specifically focus on the development of measures that have the capacity to deliver results on the ground quickly and, in particular, on the practical delivery of projects. The necessary investment and funding will be available from the Department of Transport, along with investment in other required infrastructural projects. The ten-year transport investment framework is under consideration and I am optimistic that we will be in a position in a matter of weeks to provide the final detail in respect of it.
A number of Senators mentioned park and ride facilities. If I had within my control a land bank on a main artery route into the city with an adjacent bus or rail link or if anybody indicated to me that the Department possessed such a land bank, I would dig it with shovel and spade if necessary to put a park and ride facility in place.
Joe O'Toole (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Minister of State could wear the Taoiseach's wellies.
Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have written to every transport provider and local authority more than once asking them to bring forward proposals and plans to this end — Senator Paddy Burke asked about funding in this regard — and indicated that 100% capital funding would be available. We all know the benefits of park and ride facilities and I support Senator O'Toole's view on them. I would like to see them in place. I have given the DTO a commitment with regard to five projects it has identified in this area. I had a difference of opinion with the DTO when it suggested that park and ride facilities should only be rail based. I do not support that view. We should explore the provision of park and ride facilities for all of our main arteries.
On the issue of integrated ticketing and ticket sales, as late as yesterday it was brought to my attention that a person buying a ticket in, for example, Cork to travel to Dublin, might believe it was necessary to purchase another ticket when he or she got off the train at Heuston. That person can purchase a ticket in Cork from the Iarnród Éireann desk that will take them to the city centre, with a choice of whether to travel by bus or Luas, for an extra 90 cent. We need to get the message across to people that there are smart cards available. The CSI can help develop this awareness.
I agree that infrastructural projects alone are not the solution to the congestion in Dublin. One innovation that has been of assistance in tackling congestion is the QBC initiative, which has been tremendously successful. In previous years the funding available for developing and extending QBCs went from €17 million to €23 million and, prior to my arrival in the Department, to €29 million. I am pleased to indicate that funding of €40 million is available for QBCs in Dublin this year. I would like to roll out the QBC network throughout the city.
We have heard various stories about supertrucks and the need to address the related issues of delivery and competitiveness. We did not, of course, hear the arguments about environmental costs, safety implications and damage to road infrastructure, etc. We need to make a decision on supertrucks. The new port tunnel, with an operational height of 4.65 m, will open shortly and many of our other road and rail bridges have operational heights of approximately 4.2 m. I understand the European norm is 4 m. The sooner we make the necessary decision on the size of supertrucks allowed use our network, the better. As the decision rests with me, I intend entering discussion with the representative bodies as soon as possible and coming to a satisfactory conclusion on the issue.
I would like to have more time available to go into greater detail on the Clare Street initiative. This is a genuine attempt, through my limited powers as a Minister of State, to recognise the authorities that exist with their own autonomy to deliver. I am pulling them together to work with them in a spirit of co-operation to try and address the issues in the operation of our transport network and to provide integration through collaboration and co-ordination, something that heretofore was not visible in the operation of the transport network.
The CSI has sown an important seed. It has people meeting together in a spirit of co-operation, discussing and evaluating identified projects and being unafraid to talk openly. It has appointed a sponsor to take on the project and recognises that we want a quick solution. We have had the talk and I do not want any more of it. I want action and delivery. The sooner we have it, the better.
I thank Senators for their positive reaction to my new initiative. We have had a useful exchange of views. I would like to put on record my appreciation of my Department officials, in particular Tom Ferris, who has taken detailed notes of all that has been said. We have agreed that we will take on board the issues and suggestions raised and bring them to the attention of the group. I hope we can deliver positive results from the work of this new CSI initiative.