Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to answer Questions Nos. 38 and 89 together.

First of all I want to be very clear that the issues currently arising within Bus Éireann stem from their commercial Expressway routes and are not related to taxpayer funding.

The vast majority of Bus Éireann routes and passengers relate to its PSO business and are funded by the taxpayer. In Budget 2017 I secured an 11% increase in the amount of funding available for public transport services generally and Bus Éireann will share in that increase. The Deputy is aware that Bus Éireann actually received 21% more in taxpayer funding last year as compared to 2015 and that I have publicly committed to further increasing the level of subvention as resources allow in future Budgets.

Bus Éireann also operates a much smaller network of commercial services which do not receive taxpayer funding and operate in competition with other operators. These services lose money and those losses must be addressed.

I am obviously disappointed in relation to last week's news that the WRC-led discussions between unions and Bus Éireann adjourned without agreement.

The seriousness of the Company's financial situation requires renewed efforts to reach an understanding on how to solve the company's problems. I am encouraged that recent public comments from both sides focused on the potential for a common ground to be found on potential efficiencies within the Company.

I have repeatedly stated that a difficult situation such as this involves different stakeholders with different roles to play. I have been proactive in increasing taxpayer funding for PSO services, reviewing the level of funding provided for the Free Travel Scheme and assuring rural Ireland as regards the powers of the NTA to maintain public transport connectivity.

However, last week's comments by both management and unions reinforce my stated position that there are issues internal to the Company which require attention if this situation is to be resolved.  I do not believe that any member of this House can ignore the existence of such issues when both a Company's management and a Company's trade unions are highlighting inefficiencies in work practices which require attention, as both did last week.

I'm clear that the situation requires realistic negotiations between management and unions in order to address the inefficencies both are seemingly agreed upon as existing and which will then presumably provide a pathway to a sustainable future for the Company.

As always, the industrial relations machinery of the State remains available to assist the parties in reaching a realistic, fair and sustainable settlement.