There are two ways in which one can criticise the Government's reaction: there is its long-term planning and its short-term planning. The long-term planning of consecutive Governments on this issue has been absolutely deplorable and it is no good for the Government to state that it is the fault of the planning process and the delays, although that is the case. It is the fault of the planning to some extent. It is the fault of minority groups or individuals who have been able to delay roads for five years because of spurious objections, but the planning Bill, which we will discuss next week, has been a very long time coming and it should have come a long time ago. As a result of this, where is the port tunnel? I do not know. Construction of it is apparently about to start but there are further delays. Where is the M50, the Southern Cross Motorway? I can remember, and I am not, at 50, the oldest Member of this House, being approached 22 years ago by objectors to the M50 Motorway in Rathfarnham - I think I supported those objections at the time and I might still. As far as I know, the bulk of those objections have only in recent years been defeated in one court or another. Where is the M50, the Southern Cross Motorway? It is still in the course of construction. By the time it is constructed we will need another one. We know that those parts of it which are built are already clogged where people want to gain access to or exit from them. Therefore, even the long-term plans we have in store are not adequate to deal with the long-term projections for Dublin traffic. Some 137,000 cars take to the roads of Dublin every day. That is a massive increase and it is projected to increase by a great deal more.

Where is the Luas? It has been delayed several times and I gather it has been delayed further because people cannot make up their minds whether it should be overground or underground or how much it would cost. The reality is of course that the cost is not really a problem. The Exchequer has the money for infrastructural projects of this sort but the planning process has delayed it inexcusably.

The amendment to the motion is a response of a sort. I will not address each particular aspect of it because that would take up all my time, but it talks about Government commitments to this, noting and endorsing policies. It talks about proposals and notes the transportation office's proposals and plans. It is a litany of confusion. It tells us that there are all sorts of small solutions to a very big problem and no doubt the Minister will come in with his script and say the general consensus is that the quality bus corridors are working. I have news for the Minister - they are not working. They are getting a few more people on to them. That is correct. The numbers using them are increasing by perhaps 30, 40 or 50 per cent but they are creating problems at the same time.

Everybody has boring stories about traffic and I will tell the Minister one now. I was going to come in this morning for a meeting at 9 o'clock with the Minister for Public Enterprise - unfortunately she is not here now - who was due to address an Oireachtas committee of which I am a member. I decided not to bother because getting in here at 9 o'clock from where I live seven miles from Dublin takes about an hour and a half. Instead I came in at 10.15 a.m. and I missed the meeting. I make no other excuse - it is a waste of time spending an hour and a half going to a meeting. I came in along the Stillorgan dual-carriageway and there was a dreadful traffic jam. It was much worse that it has ever been.

Mr. J. Doyle: The Senator should take the bus.

Mr. Ross: Exactly, there were buses soaring past me and there was nobody, not a soul in them. It is the wonderful solution of Dublin Corporation. These things work beautifully. The buses soar down the roads at 10.15 a.m. with no passengers on board and the car traffic is clogged up, and they tell us this is working. Of course the number of buses available at peak hours has increased. I suggest to Dublin Corporation, CIE, Bus Éireann and others, which are so forward thinking on this issue, that if they really want to encourage people to commute by bus they should allow them to do so free of charge. If we are really serious, let us introduce free travel for commuters.

Mr. Norris: Hear, hear.

Mr. Ross: That is the best way.

Ms Keogh: Does the Senator take the bus?

Mr. Ross: Everyone will pile on to the buses if they are allowed to travel free of charge. For Senator Doyle's information, this will mean that people will no longer have to queue at the bus doors because fares will not have to be collected which, in turn, will ensure a more rapid service. What will that cost?

Mr. J. Doyle: The buses are packed at present.

Mr. Ross: It will cost a certain amount of money but CIE or Bus Éireann never made any money anyway.

Mr. J. Doyle: When was the Senator last on a bus?

Mr. Ross: Let me spell out the cost involved for the former Lord Mayor. I suggest that this will mean approximately £100 million per annum in lost fares, but what is the cost of traffic problems to Dublin's economy? The figure to which I refer is roughly estimated at £1 billion per annum. It cannot be definitively proven but that figure is bandied about in knowledgeable circles and in places such as county councils, corporations, etc. There is a good case to introduce a radical emergency measure and allow commuters to travel free of charge on buses because this will encourage them to leave their cars at home. I accept that buses will have to be made more comfortable with "Morning Ireland" being broadcast upstairs and Ian Dempsey's show being played downstairs. That would be fine, there is nothing wrong with that.

There is a need to take a far more radical approach to this issue because what is happening at present - this is an example of serious political cowardice - is that small measures are being introduced to see how people take to them. If they are not accepted, they are withdrawn. The powers that be are saying, "People are so attached to their cars we do not want to offend them in any way because we might lose a few votes." That is not the right approach to a crisis, which is what we are faced with. It is no good putting in place QBCs unless park and ride facilities, integrated ticketing and many other measures are introduced. The action taken to date has not been adequate and it does not represent a proper recognition of the problem.

In addition, I do not understand - thank goodness Senator O'Toole continues to bellyache about this problem - why the Government, if it is serious about problems with the transport system, will not deregulate the taxi service. That is a scandal. There are people queuing for taxis at all hours of the day and night, particularly but not only during the rush hour. There is a good case for a serious political examination of this problem because there seems to be more to it than meets the eye. I am informed that deregulation is being strongly opposed by one element in the Government and the public needs reassuring that that is not because various taxi interests are heavy subscribers to that element. That is a political charge which must be investigated because, if that proves to be the case, it is very wrong that commuters-----

Acting Chairman (Mr. Farrell): The Senator's time is up.

Mr. Ross: I am coming to a conclusion. There is a need to appoint a traffic supremo for Dublin, someone with power to ensure that the planning regulations are fast tracked, to cut through the bureaucracy which is used as an excuse and to hasten the introduction of the Luas project and other necessary measures. This crisis is costing Dublin's economy £1 billion or something of that order. The Government's response has been totally inadequate and is a piece of flim-flam.

Mr. Norris: I congratulate Senator Ross for tabling this important motion. There is no question that traffic chaos is a fact of life in Dublin. One need only look around to see that the roads are jammed. Just this evening I walked across O'Connell Bridge and I saw container traffic stuck in the junction box adjacent to the bridge, effectively creating a total logjam. In addition, there are commuter cars, the numbers of which are higher than ever before. Senator Ross provided a very reasonable estimate of the cost of traffic problems to Dublin's economy, £1 billion, since other estimates range between £500 million and £1.5 billion. He has probably underestimated the figure, particularly in light of the fact that this is a notoriously difficult area to quantify because one must take account of various subsidiary spin-off effects. Nobody has attempted to deny that there is an extremely serious problem of traffic congestion and transport chaos in the city of Dublin because everyone accepts that such a problem exists.

I would not be quite so censorious of the Government's amendment because its contents are a mixed lot. The Government, particularly the Minister for Public Enterprise, Deputy O'Rourke, who showed a certain amount of courage in tackling the situation regarding Luas - I will return to that issue later - has put in place a number of measures. However, Senator Ross is correct to state that these are not sufficiently radical.

If one takes into account the enormous cost to the economy and the fact that, even according to the Minister for Finance, the treasury is awash with funds, there is no reason for not making a massive investment, on economic grounds, in the transport infrastructure of the city. This is very important because over the years a number of us promoted a particular view with regard to the measures required to cure the problem, notably, for example, the installation of a proper fully underground transportation system in Dublin. We were initially informed that such a measure was not technically feasible and we were then told that it might be technically feasible but - this was the critical point to which the relevant authorities returned time and again - that the necessary money was not available. Senator Ross demonstrated the cost to the economy and it must be recognised that we now have the funds to do the job properly. We should get on with doing that job and this is the House to ensure that the problem is tackled.

I remind the Minister that during the brief glorious period when the Independents held the casting vote in Seanad Éireann we managed to amend the Dublin transportation Bill to provide specifically for the examination of an underground option. We did this against the strongest possible resistance from the Department and, in particular, from CIE and its satellite bodies. I was amused on reading about the plans put forward by CIE for a partial underground line and the welcome these were given by certain newspaper correspondents who now employ the arguments we put forward which they previously trashed, scorned and ridiculed. I am a good Christian and I always welcome the converts. I rejoice more over the one sheep that was lost than over the 99 that were always right. I refer here to people on this side of the House and our good friends on the Government benches who knew perfectly well that a major part of the answer was to put in an underground railway system between the two canals.

We have won at least one leg of the argument in a practical sense. First, we won the theoretical argument and we have now persuaded the powers that be that the north-south axis should run underground. However, the east-west axis will remain on the surface. If they can see the logic of one axis running underground, why in the name of God can they not accept that the other axis should also run underground? CIE has also submitted timid plans for a partial underground which will have all sorts of complicating effects. If one considers the technical implications of these plans, it is evident that another spur will eventually have to be added in order to link the system to the airport. It also has a partial overground element in it which will limit it in terms of capacity, frequency and development, in addition to the limitation on its passenger numbers.

CIE will provide an underground railway system. Why CIE? In its entire career CIE has never developed or built a railway system. It simply closed down existing railway lines, like the Harcourt Street line. CIE has serviced and upgraded some of the lines but it has no experience. This project should be put in the hands of a private/public partnership. Over a year ago we had a Japanese consortium ready, willing and waiting to carry out the job at a considerable cost to the public purse. That consortium is still active and will undertake the job. CIE is already a year late with regard to the bits that they are supposed to be doing. How can we trust CIE? It is obvious we should get a public/private partnership involved in this project.

I made a number of submissions to the commission chaired by Mr. Justice Seán O'Leary. Unfortunately, the arguments in favour of installing the second axis to the underground were largely ruled out.

Dublin is a tourist centre. We encourage tour buses but what do we do with them? You can see them parked in lines along Trinity College railings. Why do we not provide one or more central bus parks? We also have licensed private operators creating chaos by parking on public streets all over the city. They park in parking bays. Sometimes they take up as much as five or six parking spaces, yet when you ring up the parking metre people you are told they are more or less exempt. Why is that? What is the real situation regarding these buses? We will never get private buses off the roads until we provide a proper central parking station. I accept that private enterprise should help pay for such a station and that taxpayers should not be expected to subsidise private enterprise entirely, but there should also be co-operation between city authorities and private enterprise.

With regard to buses, Senator Ross is lucky if he saw buses in the bus lane. I never see them in bus lanes. They are all over the road. Private motorists cannot use bus lanes but the buses disdain them. To use Senator Ross's word, they soar along the bits that are supposed to be available to the private motorist. It is now proposed to have one lane in O'Connell Street. This measure is part of the concerted plan to drive the private motorist out of the city. I warn this House time and time again against using the infrastructure of this city as a weapon against the citizens.

Yes, I have an interest in this issue. Senator Ross is always telling me that I must declare my interests. I live in this city. I took the advice of the city authorities and came back to live in the city. Do I not have the right to own a car? Am I not entitled to drive occasionally when ill health or inclement weather necessitates the use of automatic transport?

With regard to delivery vans, how do they get away with on street parking? Why do they not have to operate during regulated times? Are people delivering money to banks exempted? I see them all over the place. They deliver money any time they like. They drive up on the pavements and have their wheels parked all over the place. They do not give a damn. If you look at them they give you the impression that they will shoot you or hit you on the head with a stick. Skips are also left all over the place.

I would like to refer to measures that could be engaged in that would help motorcyclists. What have we done for motorcycles? They are a cheap, environmentally friendly and energy efficient method of transport, yet they are not allowed use bus lanes. Why not? It would get them off the middle of the road. Motorcycles are extremely dangerous. Why not allow motorcyclists to use the bus lanes, particularly since the buses do not use them? Why not penalise public transport when, as they often do, buses double park and park with their backsides sticking out so no-one can get past them? Then they expect to be given the authority to put up signs on the back of the buses in the shape of a thumb asking to please let them out. I agree to that measure as long as they treat other people with the same respect, which they do not always do. However, I sympathise with the difficult job that bus drivers must do.

Taxis and hackney cabs are also not allowed use bus lanes. Why not? Regulations have been approved to allow them to put a sign on the top of their vehicles which will allow the police to identify them. Let us have a bit of action on that measure to allow taxis use bus lanes.

I supported the people who clamp vehicles even though they infuriated my neighbours. I even developed a little song which goes as follows: "Clamp, clamp, clamp, the boys are marching". This song drove my neighbours mad. I liked those members of the traffic department because they drove some people out of the city. Let us have them sent to a school of ethics. This is Mrs. Thatcher's little boyos in operation. I have seen them.

It is essential that we do not antagonise and alienate people. I have heard filthy language from some of the people conducting the clamping of vehicles. I have seen them deliberately tease people. Sometimes they would say that it is one minute to 8.30 p.m. and tell them to run up to a machine for a ticket but when they returned exhausted from running up and down they just said, "Five seconds too late." Let us have a little bit of decent manners even though they are not public servants. It is a pity that this job was not given to Dublin Corporation. Instead the Government contracted it out to a British firm. How is that for the Republican Party?

Mr. Walsh: I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:

"Seanad Éireann, recognising that measures to ease traffic congestion in Dublin are being implemented within the framework of the integrated transportation strategy for the greater Dublin area as originally set out in the final report of the Dublin Transportation Initiative, welcomes the commitment of the Government to implementation of the DTI strategy and, in particular:

-- notes that the Operational Programme for Transport 1994 to 1999 provides for investment in excess of £600 million in transport infrastructure in Dublin;

-- supports the Government endorsement of the Dublin Transportation Office short-term action plan which is designed to advance and accelerate a set of measures consistent with the DTI Strategy which can be completed in the period to end 2000;

-- supports the Government's commitment to provide a light rail system for Dublin, with the city section underground, consisting of Tallaght-Connolly Station and Sandyford-Dublin Airport lines;

-- notes the acquisition of additional DART rolling stock, construction of new DART and suburban railway stations and implementation of quality bus corridors is proceeding as quickly as possible consistent with the need for adequate public consultation and compliance with relevant tendering and contract procedures;

-- welcomes the continuing progress on upgrading the Maynooth-Clonsilla suburban rail line;

-- supports the Government's commitment to provide key additional road infrastructure for Dublin, in particular, the Southern Cross and south-eastern motorways, to complete the Dublin C ring, and an access route to Dublin Port;

-- notes the Government's commitment to fund new road schemes associated with traffic management measures such as the Coombe by-pass and Macken Street bridge;

-- welcomes the removal of benefit-in-kind taxation from public transport passes provided by employers for their employees;

-- endorses the policy of promoting better use of road space in Dublin through implementation of a range of traffic management measures and intensified enforcement of traffic regulations;

-- notes the provision by end of 1999 of an additional 150 buses by Dublin Bus at a cost of £26 million;

-- endorses the Government's provision of £2 million in 1999 for the development of park and ride facilities and the inclusion in the 1999 Finance Act of tax incentives to promote the development of such facilities;

-- welcomes the commitment to complete 12 quality bus corridors and the cycle network by the end of 2000;

-- notes the proposals of the Dublin Transportation Office in the Dublin Transportation Blueprint 2000-2006 for an investment in excess of £2 billion in the Dublin area in the context of the national development plan;

-- notes that the Dublin Transportation Office is now urgently completing a formal review of the DTI strategy to update the strategy and renew its impetus."

Forgive me if I do not perform a duet with Senator Norris. Our transport system is not commensurate with the needs of the economy in its current developed state and, therefore, certain criticisms are justified. But criticisms must take account of many developments that have taken place, particularly in the past decade or more, which have placed a serious strain on infrastructure. The current problems highlight a lack of foresight a number of decades ago to anticipate the needs of the population and the economy. However, the unprecedented growth that we have witnessed in recent times probably could not have been anticipated ten or 15 years ago. At that time many people in the transport industry were saying that there was a dearth of investment which needed to be addressed. The failure to do so was acknowledged by people within the Commission in Brussels. They said that this issue should have been addressed back in the late 1970s, early 1980s and throughout the 1980s.

The growth in the number of cars has already been alluded to. Over recent years we have had a 30 per cent increase in the amount of traffic in Dublin. In the period from 1998 to 2006 economists predicted that the number of cars registered in Ireland would escalate by 60 per cent. This will put increased strain on our existing road network. Therefore, it must be acknowledged that forward planning has been deficient. Past initiatives and investment were not commensurate with the requirement. Equally it must also be acknowledged that the growth in traffic using Dublin Port has doubled in recent years and will reach 19 million tonnes this year.

Air travel has become more accessible to a wider range of our community and traffic to and from Dublin Airport has doubled in the period 1991 to 1998. Last year 11.6 million people travelled through Dublin Airport.

I would not like to portray the traffic problem as being confined to Dublin. There is a specific problem in Dublin but it is evident that there is a need for significant investment in infrastructure nationally to meet the transport needs of the next 20 years when the population will grow considerably and the number of cars and heavy goods vehicles will increase.

The operational programme for transport for 1994-9 invested of £600 million in the transport infrastructure in Dublin. That should be acknowledged. Unfortunately it coincided with a period of growth which was unanticipated.

The endorsement of the Dublin Transportation Office short-term action plan should be welcomed. This will advance and accelerate measures consistent with the DTI strategy which will be completed by the end of 2000. While current measures are welcome, adherence to their implementation is the most important aspect of this debate. Infrastructural improvements do not take place overnight. This Government and its successor cannot rectify the mistakes of the past and the lack of investment by waving a magic wand. The provision, acknowledged by Senator Ross, made by Minister O'Rourke for light rail, and her courageous decision to build part of that system underground, is a step in the right direction. A capital city growing at the pace of Dublin should have an underground rail system, which would do much to alleviate present difficulties. That was not realised in the past but it is now prominent on the agenda and its speedy implementation is vital.

The quality bus corridors will improve the traffic flow in Dublin. The time has come for us to take a more liberal view on them. I agree with Senator Norris that removing traffic by making it more difficult to travel by car is not the right approach. Like other countries, we should allow the quality bus corridors to be used by private cars which contain three or more people. That would encourage the sharing of cars and reduce of the number of cars on the roads at peak time.

The completion of the Southern Cross and the upgrading of the Naas dual carriageway to a motorway should be tackled as a matter of urgency. Why has the serious mistake made at the Red Cow Inn not been corrected? To place a bottleneck in the middle of the road which leads to three of the main population centres outside Dublin - Waterford, Limerick and Cork - reflects very unenlightened thinking.

More innovation is needed. The removal of benefit in kind taxation on public transport passes is the sort of initiative which will encourage people to leave their cars at home. Public transport must also be attractive so people will use it. The investment in buses was a first step in that direction but much more remains to be done. I am sure the Minister will outline the measures which will be taken in his address to the House.

Mrs. Ridge: There is an old song which says that Dublin can be heaven with coffee at eleven and a stroll down Stephen's Green. That would be the only time it can be heaven because if you are driving it is pure hell. On Monday I took my son to the airport. I left this building at 6.30 p.m. and arrived at Dublin Airport at 7.30 p.m., taking an hour to drive eight miles and that was not even at peak traffic time. I am as guilty as anyone who was in a car but there was no other way to get from here to there. It was a reasonable mode of transport for three people and luggage. We all heard what happened in Dublin on Saturday afternoon - two and a half hours to get out of the car park at the St. Stephen's Green Centre.

I condemn the Government for its lack of action on the dreadful overcrowding on the DART and Maynooth commuter line. It is inevitable that there will be an accident. People are standing by the time the train arrives at the second station and they are then herded into the vans at the back. One commentator remarked that it was so like India the only difference was that people were not standing on the roof.

I have spoken many times in this House about the lip service paid to access for those with disabilities. There are only five low floor buses for those with a physical disability and we are still waiting for a voice-over on the DART trains for the visually impaired after 16 years of operation.

The long promised link from Heuston to Connolly and on to the DART is still awaited. I am old enough to remember when the railway siding at the CIE works in Inchicore was opened during the summer to take the citizens of Dublin under the park and on to the Bray line. That cannot be done now, in spite of the fact that most of the population lives in the south-`west. We are told that the line needs to be strengthened and can only be used for goods trains. This excuse has been used for ten years now. It would a wonderful line for commuters from Kildare.

The Government will be blamed for this, yet the rate of progress remains abysmal. I have been a member of the steering committee of the Dublin Transportation Initiative and the Dublin Transportation Office since March 1992. I acknowledge that circumstances have changed since then, especially with regard to the number of car owners. The office has not made progress and it is easy to understand why. However, I do not understand why we cannot get our act together to provide a transport system for those who live in Dublin and the surrounding area. There are plenty of words but no wheels.

I have a complete library of reports at home which were published by the constituent bodies that make up the DTO. They cost a great deal of money but few recommendations have been implemented. Can Dublin not learn from the experience of other cities? As a member of the DTO I visited Strasbourg, Grenoble and Saint Denis, a deprived suburb of Paris, all of which had light rail systems. The wonderful aspect of light rail is that it carries a large volume of people and does away with the need for special vehicles for the disabled because the floor of the carriages is at the same level as the platforms. One can buy a ticket at a vending machine and the trains empty and fill in seconds. Special vehicles are not needed for prams or for those who are on crutches or wheelchair bound and a large number of people can stand. I do not know why we cannot get our act together.

Operation Freeflow, in which the DTO was involved, was a success, but why it is implemented only at Christmas? I expect to be entitled to free travel by the time the transport problem is solved. I have been a member of the committee for eight years and I still have not witnessed any major progress. Dublin Corporation's latest publication is entitled "Getting Dublin Moving" but I would put a huge question mark at the end of that title because I am pessimistic. I acknowledge the work of the DTO but how can any single grouping or body work when all its constituent members have a vested interest in getting a deal for themselves?

Ms Keogh: Hear, hear.

Mrs. Ridge: I appeal to the Minister of State for a Dublin transport authority. Fine Gael introduced such a concept when it was in Government many years ago but it was thrown out. I agree with Senator Ross that one institution, person or body is needed which will deal with this issue, provided it is given the necessary finance. The following bodies are involved in transport - the Departments of the Taoiseach, Public Enterprise, Justice, Equality and Law Reform, with regard to the Garda and traffic, and Environment and Local Government; DTO, John Henry; Eircom, telecommunications service provider; Bord Gáis, responsible for underground works; ESB; CIE; Dublin Bus; Bus Eireann; Iarnród Eireann; Garda Síochána; Dublin Corporation; Dún Laoighaire-Rathdown County Council; Fingal County Council; South Dublin County Council; Kildare County Council; Wicklow County Council; Meath County Council; Dublin Port; Dún Laoighaire Harbour; Dublin Docklands Authority; and the IDA.

How will progress be made? Two senior Ministers have direct responsibility for this area but it is obvious, given the urgency of this problem in Dublin, that it should be spearheaded and driven by one outfit. I always like to adopt a positive approach but I must condemn the Government because it has not done the necessary work.

Dublin's current traffic problems have been particularly exacerbated by the country's unprecedented economic success since 1994. This is demonstrated by a dramatic increase in car ownership in Dublin from 235 cars per 1000 head of population in 1991 to 321 per 1000 in 1998; an unprecedented increase in shipments through Dublin Port from 7.7 million tonnes in 1991 to 18.5 million tonnes in 1998; and a large increase in passenger numbers through Dublin airport from 5.5 million in 1991 to more than 11.6 million in 1998. Each of these elements has added extra traffic to the city street network.

Meeting Dublin's transport problems requires a shared responsibility and commitment to action by all the key players, including business organisations, transport authorities, communities and individuals as well as Government. An integrated, comprehensive and multi-agency approach is also needed. To be successful, this must involve adequate investment in new public transport facilities and road infrastructure; effective measures to manage traffic demand in Dublin; parking restraint, enforcement and reallocation of road space; and good institutional arrangements to carry forward this integrated approach to transport management in Dublin.

The basis for transportation planning in Dublin has been set out in the final report of the Dublin Transportation Initiative which was published in 1995. In its basic principles, and subject to necessary updating, this is still considered a valid prescription for better transport management for Dublin. It has been supported by successive Governments. I confirm the Government's commitment to the DTI strategy and its support for the work of the Dublin Transportation Office, which is charged with co-ordinating the DTI strategy and is urgently completing a formal review of the strategy.

The DTI process has significantly helped the case for EU assistance for transport investment in Dublin. The Operational Programme for Transport 1994-99 envisages expenditure in excess of £600 million to implement DTI recommendations within its funding period. Promotion of sustainable transport is at the core of DTI. This includes the development of a high quality, efficient public transport system and a reduction in the dominance of the private car in Dublin transport arrangements. DTI proposed a combination of measures including a significant improvement in public transport services; selected new road construction; traffic management measures; and effective compliance with, and enforcement of, traffic and parking.

However, the Government fully recognises that it is necessary to undertake measures to address, in the shorter term, the greater than anticipated growth in traffic in the Dublin area. The Dublin Transportation Office Short-Term Action Plan, published in September 1998, which has been endorsed by the Government, is designed to advance and accelerate a set of measures, consistent with the DTI strategy, which can be completed before the end 2000. Detailed objectives include completion of 12 QBCs and 180 kilometres of cycle tracks by end 2000; provision by end 1999 of an additional 150 buses by Dublin Bus at a cost of £26 million; additional rolling stock for DART; lengthening of outer suburban and key DART station platforms; and upgrading of the Maynooth-Clonsilla rail line.

Building on the short-term action plan, the Dublin Transportation Office recently published proposals for investment in Dublin's infrastructure in 2000-06 amounting to in excess of £2 billion. The main elements of the investment programme include further quality bus corridors and additional bus capacity, enhanced suburban rail services, additional park and ride facilities, the introduction of integrated ticketing of public transport services and further cycle infrastructure and facilities. The blueprint also endorses the light rail for Dublin as approved by Government in 1998 and the National Roads Authority national roads programme in the Dublin Transport Initiative area. The proposals in the blueprint are intended to input into the forthcoming national development plan.

The Government fully appreciates the social and economic importance of public transport services and is committed to creating the conditions for the provision of the best possible public transport services in Dublin in all circumstances. A key element of the DTI strategy is the completion of a light rail system for the city. Good progress is being made on advancing this project.

On 5 May 1998 the Government decided to proceed with a light rail network comprising a surface line from Tallaght to Connolly Station based on the CIE preferred surface alignment from Tallaght to O'Connell Street and a line from Sandyford to Ballymun and Dublin Airport, using the Harcourt Street and Broadstone disused railway alignments and with an underground section in the city centre.

Light rail orders in respect of the Tallaght to Abbey Street line (Line A) and the Sandyford to St. Stephen's Green line (Line B) have been signed by my colleague, the Minister for Public Enterprise. An application by CIE for a light rail order in respect of the Abbey Street to Connolly Station line (Line C) will be the subject of a public inquiry to be held in December. Public consultation on the Broadstone-Ballymun/Dublin Airport line is also continuing. Geotechnical studies on the proposed underground section between St. Stephen's Green and Broadstone are expected to be complete before the end of the year.

In December 1998 the Minister for Public Enterprise also commissioned Arthur Andersen, consultants, to advise on a possible public private partnership approach to the Dublin light rail project. The consultant report was submitted to Government and is being examined by the Department of Public Enterprise in consultation with all interested parties. The main conclusions of the report is that a PPP approach can and should be adopted for certain elements of the light rail project. Following the consultative process, the Minister for Public Enterprise will be making proposals to Government regarding a PPP approach to the light rail project.

The light rail project is only one element of the public transport strategy recommended by DTI. Other important work is underway on a number of fronts to improve Dublin's public transportation network. This includes the following.

An additional 150 buses will have been added to the Dublin Bus fleet by the end of 1999. This will increase the peak hour capacity of the bus network by more than 40 per cent. The Government has for the first time made available Exchequer funding in an amount of £20 million for this purpose, in addition to EU funding of £5.5 million. Some 125 of these buses have been delivered to date.

Twelve quality bus corridors will be provided to ensure the efficient operation of these buses; three of these are already in place. The development of these quality bus corridors is a vital element in the overall solution to Dublin's traffic problems. The results from the Lucan and Malahide QBCs, which have been in operation for some time, indicate an increase in total person trips, a considerable reduction in bus journey times and an increase in bus passengers of between 15 and 20 per cent on the routes. Preliminary results for the Stillorgan QBC are even more impressive. Bus patronage on this corridor has more than doubled in the short time since the QBC became operational. An increase of 130 per cent was recorded in week three of the operation and a survey of new bus users indicates that 60 per cent of people have transferred from the car.

The completion of the DART extension to Greystones and Malahide and the upgrading of the Maynooth-Clonsilla suburban rail line are well advanced. Peak hour capacity on the DART and suburban rail network will be increased by 60 per cent through the provision of additional DART and rail carriages, again being partially funded by both Exchequer and EU.

The provision of park and ride facilities is being encouraged by the inclusion on a tax incentive regime in the Finance Act, aimed at encouraging the participation of the private sector in the development of park and ride facilities, and also by the provision of £2 million in the 1999 budget for the development of such facilities in the Dublin area. This funding is currently being used for the development of new and the upgrading of existing, mainly rail based, park and ride facilities.

The removal of benefit in kind from public transport passes provided by employers for their employees should encourage greater usage of public transport.

Looking to the future, the Minister for Public Enterprise announced earlier this year that the Government had agreed that she should arrange for detailed costing and feasibility studies to be carried out on the development of the suburban rail network in both the short and the longer terms. A short-term development programme will concentrate on possible developments based on the existing network.

The strategic planning guidelines for the greater Dublin area included a number of suggestions for improving and enhancing the network in the longer term and CIE has now appointed consultants to advise the company in this regard. The consultants are expected to report in December.

With regard to bus based services, CIE is to review the Dublin Bus network with a view to identify gaps in the existing network and a possible need for a better mesh of services. These could include the possible expansion of the QBC network and the provision of orbital services, recognising the continuing growth of employment and travel requirements outside the immediate city centre; feeder services development to QBC and rail services and the development of local bus networks, particularly in self-sufficient development centres.

The DTI strategy sets out a number of selective major road projects which are critical to managing Dublin transport. I am pleased to note that the Southern Cross section of the C-ring is currently under construction with completion anticipated in 2001. In addition, the south eastern motorway, the last leg of the C-ring and the northern motorway, linking the airport to the Balbriggan bypass, are due to commence next year. Regarding the Dublin Port Tunnel, the House may be assured that we will deal with the motorway scheme and the EIS currently with my Department as quickly as possible. These major improvements are vital for improved road capacity and they will substantially complete the major road network around the city centre.

I am concerned to advance the construction of a second toll bridge at the Westlink on the M50. A motorway scheme and an EIS are with my Department and, following the submission of the necessary toll scheme for the project by the NRA, a public inquiry will be carried out as soon as possible.

There are also a number of short-term measures designed to reduce congestion. These include the construction of free-flow slips at major interchanges on the M50 which should be completed next year. In addition, access to Dublin Airport will be improved as a result of a co-operative, cost-sharing effort between the NRA and Aer Rianta involving the provision of an overbridge and the construction of free-flow slips at the airport roundabout. Work on these free-flow slips should be completed by the end of next year.

We also need short-term management measures to combat traffic congestion while the delivery of major new infrastructure is awaited. Measures to control congestion for the next number of years include continuous improvement of the bus service in quantity and quality to make it an attractive alternative to car travel; Government funding for new roads associated with traffic management measures including the Coombe bypass, Macken Street Bridge and the North King Street projects; traffic management improvements for the benefit of all modes of travel; removal of the impediments to the use of the bicycle as a mode of transport. There is potential to double the number of cyclists with the provision of adequate safe cycle facilities. Already over 70 kilometres of cycle track have been built and the expectation is that a further 110 kilometres will be in place by the end of 2000. Operation Freeflow will again be intensified for the Christmas-New Year period. In addition, the director of traffic appointed for Dublin city has brought a greater concentration and efficiency to traffic administration and has implemented a strong enforcement policy.

The Government is committed to a sustained and co-ordinated action to deal with the traffic situation in Dublin. The NDP will provide for further acceleration of investment in Dublin's transport infrastructure. It is clear there is no single quick fix solution to Dublin's traffic problems. It requires sustained and co-ordinated action across a broad range of fronts by all the relevant agencies having regard to the substantial list of measures I have outlined.

It is also clear however that solving Dublin's traffic problems will depend not just on action by public authorities but on individuals making sustainable travel choices. For example, traffic congestion can be reduced by the greater use of public transport. With the advent of quality bus corridors allowing the provision of a quick, reliable and regular service we can look forward to a substantial increase in the numbers choosing to use public transport in preference to the private car.

The task of delivering sustainable transport for Dublin is not an easy one. To make Dublin a pleasant city in which to live for everyone, the Government and its agencies are determined to succeed in the task.

I commend the amended motion to the House.

Mr. J. Doyle: I support the motion but disagree with using the word "chaos". Dublin has major traffic problems but they are far from being chaotic. When we look at Dublin's traffic problem we have to look at the economic growth the city has enjoyed in the past number of years. I remember - as you, a Leas-Chathaoirleach, will remember - in the 1950s and 1960s when hotels were closing, including the Russel Hotel and Hibernian Hotel, next door, because Dublin had no tourists. There was no business in the city.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I was told about the events, Senator.

Mr. J. Doyle: I did not know it was that far back. Dublin has changed since then and has become a young and vibrant city. I am sure you are aware of that, a Leas-Chathaoirligh. Dublin is the third most popular holiday destination in Europe, playing host to over 3 million tourists per year. It has surpassed Rome and is the third most visited city after London and Paris. Who would have envisaged that ten years ago? Three million tourists visiting a city of a country with a population of just over 3 million generate considerable traffic. This year Dublin Airport carried 13 million passengers; I understand it expects to double that number by 2000. Dublin Port is enjoying enormous success. I understand it carried 60 million tonnes of cargo this year and that it intends to increase the tonnage capacity in the coming years. This puts pressure on the road network. The road network has not changed, it has not been added to or widened; it is still the same network that existed in the 1950s and 1960s. Even with this phenomenal change, Dublin still has to carry the same amount of traffic.

Dublin could become the victim of its own success, the success we have enjoyed over the past ten years, unless certain measures are taken to deal with the traffic problems. One measure which has been taken is the establishment of the office of director of traffic. The solution to Dublin's traffic problems depends on achieving a significant change in the travel pattern of commuter motorists. We must accept that the ever increasing demand for private car travel cannot be catered for and we must encourage a shift to public transport, cycling and walking. If motorists are to be encouraged to use public transport it is crucial that public transport is available.

Senator Ross said some of the buses are empty at midday and are full only in the mornings and evenings. The reason for the quality bus corridors is to take commuter traffic out of the city and to allow other motorists, between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m., to drive into the city and do business. Given the clamping of illegally parked vehicles there is now room for motorists to park legally in the city centre.

One of the major problems is that Dublin city has to bear a large volume of traffic that has nothing to do with the city. To get from the South to the North and to the west, traffic has to pass through the city centre. Measures have been put in place to deal with that problem, one of which is the port tunnel. The eastern by-pass is another part of a ring road that is necessary around the city. On this I take issue with the Government because the eastern by-pass was in our development plan in 1992. On the eve of the general election in 1992 the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, for some unknown reason, instructed Dublin Corporation to withdraw the eastern bypass from its development plan.

Mr. Cassidy: The rainbow played a part.

Mr. J. Doyle: Because of this we are a number of years behind but it has been included in our recent development plan. It is important to get traffic, which has no business in the city, on to a ring road around the city. However, there is opposition to any measures proposed - the port tunnel, the eastern bypass and even the quality bus corridor. Just a week before Dublin Corporation introduced the quality bus corridor the AA issued a press release stating: "The proposed quality bus corridor on Leeson Street, Donnybrook, Stillorgan is a traffic disaster waiting to happen. It is deeply flawed and will worsen the congestion on Dublin's southside rather than improve it. The AA calls on the Government to intervene with Dublin Corporation to have the opening postponed." It is extraordinary that there is opposition to everything you do. Progress has been made in regard to Dublin traffic.

The director of traffic has produced a document "Getting Dublin Moving" which I assume most Dublin Senators have received. A certain number of measures have been introduced in that document.

To respond to Senator Norris, hackneys will be allowed to use the quality bus corridors as soon as they have the necessary sign. We are very anxious to accommodate them. I disagree with Senator Walsh that motorists carrying two or three passengers should be allowed to use the quality bus corridors. That would defeat the purpose in providing them. They must be kept free for buses, taxis and hackneys. If other categories are provided for we will be back to square one.

This is an interesting debate. It is not an easy problem to solve. There has been an enormous increase in the volume of traffic throughout the city while the road network has remained unchanged. We are depending on the Government to provide the necessary support for the Luas system, to complete the port tunnel and the eastern bypass, each of which is essential.

I do not share Senator Ross's view that there should be free bus travel for all. In sanctioning an increase in Dublin Bus fares at this time, however, the Minister is sending the wrong signal. It defeats the purpose of encouraging the public to use public transport.

Ms Keogh: I welcome the opportunity to debate once again the matter of traffic congestion in Dublin. The motion reads:

That Seanad Éireann condemns the Government for its failure to take effective emergency measures to resolve the traffic chaos in Dublin.

The only emergency measure that would work is the banning of cars from tomorrow morning. The Progressive Democrats are aware that radical action is required to deal with the problem. Despite the considerable investment in road infrastructure in the greater Dublin area in the past ten years there is severe congestion. The position has worsened substantially. Whenever it rains the city grinds to a halt at peak hours. There is gridlock. When I used the DART yesterday evening it was thronged. I do not use it as much as I would wish; I avoid commuting at peak hours. I therefore welcome the expansion of the service. The lack of a good transport system is damaging the quality of life of the citizens of the city and poses a threat to our economic prospects as it affects the attitude of tourists and foreign investors.

We know what the causes of the problem are. The key elements of the road development programme are now over four years behind schedule while the rates of increase in economic growth, car ownership and traffic volumes are way in excess of what was projected a few years ago. We have to ensure the completion of long overdue road projects, including the M50 which was held up in the courts for four years by the actions of one individual. This is unbelievable. The common good was ignored by the individual concerned. It is now being further delayed by greedy people. This is outrageous. Its completion is badly required to alleviate traffic congestion in the city. I anticipate the Minister for the Environment and Local Government will be able to deal with this problem in the upcoming planning legislation. The port access tunnel has been mentioned, as have the Macken Street bridge, the Coombe-Cork Street relief road and the Dundrum-Wickham bypass.

To a certain extent the difficulties can be attributed to under-investment in public transport and the failure to achieve improvements in efficiency and to introduce competition in public transport in the past decade. Public transport policy has to be dictated by the needs of commuters. There is a need for a regional transport authority to plan and regulate all aspects of public transport in the greater Dublin area. The city cannot be considered in isolation.

It is critical that there is competition in the bus sector. The reactions to the introduction of competition on the airport route were amusing. There should be competition on a wide variety of routes. Independent operators should be allowed to tender for routes and services in competition with Dublin Bus.

There have been major improvements in DART and rail services. There is a need for a fast and frequent commuter train service in and out of the capital.

Many Senators complained on the Order of Business about the taxi service in the city, a hobby-horse of mine. The market should be deregulated. Existing plateholders can be compensated. I welcome the decision in the review of the programme for Government to increase progessively the number of taxi licences as quickly as possible. Entry to the taxi market has been restricted since 1978. Demand far outstrips supply, not just during what one would consider busy periods such as weekends and Christmas. We were informed this morning that no one could get a taxi from Heuston Station. This is ludicrous. It is an understatement therefore to say that the taxi regime does not meet the needs of the public.

While I welcome the steps which have been taken, more needs to be done. Measures to take cars off the road are required. I have suggested previously that there should be a pipeline for fuel products from Dublin Port to the M50 to obviate the need for a considerable number of heavy goods vehicles to cross the city. While a degree of patience is required, we must get moving on this as quickly as possible.

I welcome the investment that has been announced but we must look to the future and, in particular, to public-private partnerships to try to ensure that transportation policy can be developed as quickly as possible so that people can get to and from their places of work without the awful prospect of sitting in one spot for an hour during the day. Now that we are approaching Christmas, Operation Freeflow should be put in place again.

Mr. O'Toole: This House should concentrate on national issues. I would prefer if we were discussing the national traffic problem rather than the Dublin traffic problem. It is too simplistic to condemn the Government for not addressing the traffic problem, regardless of the parties in Government.

There are issues for which all of us in the Oireachtas must take responsibility and some of those have been referred to by the previous speaker. I have raised the issue of taxis on the Order of Business for over a year. I am in town every morning by 7.30 a.m. and I would gladly leave my car in Finglas if I could get a hackney that could travel in the bus lane, but my journey would take longer by hackney than if I were to drive my own car. If I were lucky enough to get a taxi, it could take me in but that is another day's work. Whoever is responsible for the taxi problem deserves to be condemned in the fullest of terms. It is ridiculous and shows extraordinary ignorance and insensitivity that 2,000 hackney drivers in this city have to carry passengers in the same lanes as other cars with one passenger, thereby making it of no added value to take a hackney into town. Who is responsible for that? Is it a Government or a local government decision? I would like to know the answer to that question.

We should also have a declaration of interests because various politicians are being blamed for having vested interests in taxi and hackney companies. I do not mind if people are involved in this business; they are entitled to be involved in any business but they should declare the interest and defend it or otherwise if that is where the problem lies.

There are ways to deal with the taxi problem. I could give ten different formulae for dealing with it but let us take a simple one. There are 2,000 taxis in Dublin. If we buy all those plates at £60,000 each, which would cost £120 million, and lease them back at a 10 per cent premium per year, the initiative would pay for itself in ten years. I would privatise the lot. Neither the Government nor the local authorities should be involved in the row about taxis. People who put their life savings or their redundancy money towards buying a taxi plate should be protected. That can be done in a fair way by putting a price on them or it can be dealt with in some other way. This area should be privatised immediately.

I do not agree that this sector should be fully deregulated. I have visited many cities, some very advanced, where deregulated taxis operate. In Toronto, for example, taxis are cheap and easily available but many of them are a danger to health and safety. The Tánaiste said on another issue earlier that we do not need regulation on the numbers of taxis but on the quality of taxis and that cars should go through strict testing on a regular basis.

This is a quality of life issue. It is about the safety of young people and parents wondering whether their children can get home from a Christmas function. It is about young couples waiting for taxis on College Green until 4 a.m. Somebody is responsible for this problem and they should kick themselves into gear and sort it out. Although it came from my own benches, it is too simplistic to put a motion before the House condemning the Government. I would like the people responsible for this problem to be before the House so that we can deal with it.

Reference was made to people objecting to everything but we, as politicians, have contributed to that problem. When people come to see me to object to planning issues I ask them how long they have lived in the area and if anybody raised an objection when they moved into the area. These people are being encouraged by politicians. Opposition politicians have always encouraged people who would take a stand against Government plans for development. It goes with the territory and Members on all sides of the House must take responsibility for that. We are all familiar with the NIMBY factor - not in my back yard. That has now been replaced with BANANA - build anything nowhere or anywhere near anything. One only has to stick a spade in the ground and there will be a queue of people lining up to object in case a concrete block is being put in instead of potatoes.

We have not taken decisions on this problem but some cities have done so. Boston is building an eight lane highway under the city. It has taken the authorities seven years to do it. It is being built underground and anybody who objects can leave the city. We should have more of that attitude here. The underground projects that have been talked about by the past three Governments should be commenced. Even if the Government decides to build overground, they should go ahead and do it. We live in a society in which bus lanes are put all over the city, but if one is put outside RTE it is national news for three weeks. The Government and Dublin Corporation indulges RTE instead of telling it to mind its own business and run the national airwaves.

Mr. Cassidy: Hear, hear.

Mr. O'Toole: Bus lanes are important and they work. I am a car driver who has to travel beside a bus lane every morning on my way into town but there is too much indulgence of mealy-mouthed people and their public representatives who listen to them on these issues. We need to take a hard line in that regard.

The trains in this country are a disgrace. Recently I wanted to travel from Cork by public transport at 8 p.m. The only way I could do that was to get a taxi to the airport, get a plane to London and then another plane from London to Cork because there was no train operating at that time of the night. I want to go to Derry on Friday night. I cannot travel by plane or by train so I must take the car. Large numbers of people have to travel by car because the train services cease to operate at 9 p.m. Before somebody stands up and says "blame the unions", I say we should buy the unions if that is what is necessary to get a proper service. We should have 24 hour train services. People are talking about opening the line to Navan but they should stop talking and just do it. A train can carry between 500 and 1,000 passengers. We have trains with only half the number of carriages because somebody will not increase the length of the platforms. Trains are 15 minutes late because somebody will not invest money in a new platform in Killarney or wherever else. Trains have to back into stations which they should be in and out of in three minutes. I could go on but I will simply say that we have not put the necessary infrastructure in place.

It is impossible to travel without a car in this country. As late as today I received two memos explaining why I could not travel to Derry by public transport on Friday evening to attend a function on Friday night. I have to go to Cork early next week. I can travel down by train but I will have to stay overnight because I cannot return by train. It goes on and on. Decisions will have to be taken at many levels. The Government and local authorities are responsible for this problem but so are we. It is time to get the finger out and get the country moving properly.

Ms Ormonde: I want to share my time with the Leader, Senator Cassidy.

An Cathaoirleach: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Ms Ormonde: This debate is timely. Having read the Minister's contribution, I hope Senators Ross, Norris, Quinn, Henry and O'Toole will withdraw this motion which condemns the Government for its failure. The Government has not failed. It will introduce many measures which are not ready to be brought before the House. There are no quick-fix solutions to this problem but we must see what is available. The Government has already introduced the short-term action plan. I will list some of the measures. Eleven bus corridors are being implemented, three of which are completed with eight to be completed within the next year. There will be 150 extra buses by the end of 1999, which is a great achievement. This action plan started in 1998. This is only 1999 and already we have 150 extra buses coming on stream. We have also authorised extra DART carriages and lengthening of DART platforms, which will help those who live outside the city. We have also set about providing park-and-ride facilities but there is a problem finding sites for such facilities. The Minister of State referred to tax incentives for participation in the park-and-ride concept.

The process has been slowed down by the need for democratic procedures to take place. Everyone has the right to examine what is being implemented in their area, to object and to give reasons for their objections. That is democracy and we must accept it. However, having said that, we must also take into account that many objections are only made for the sake of objecting or because of the NIMBY syndrome, to which reference has already been made.

Reference was made to the M50. There were High Court and Supreme Court actions seeking to prevent the implementation of that route. However, it is now almost completed, six months ahead of schedule. It is a joint venture between Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, South Dublin County Council and Ascon Development. The Opposition wants to condemn the Government but I think we are making great progress. I compliment the two councils on the big role they are playing in ensuring the infrastructure for the area is in place, having had to wait since Dublin County Council took over the construction of part of the M50. That dates back to when I first became a councillor in 1987.

There is movement. We have much more to do and there are huge blackspots. There is a lack of co-ordination between local authorities, the Dublin Transport Office, the Garda and so on. However, when they put their heads together in regard to the construction of the M50 matters moved quickly. I compliment the Government on the provision of cycle lanes and bus corridors. It is not all ready yet and there is a great deal more work to be done. However, we will have freely flowing traffic within 12 months in this city, to which I am looking forward. We must knock heads together to ensure there is co-ordination because these matters often fail due to a lack of co-ordination between the different bodies involved.

Mr. Cassidy: I wish to add my voice to everything that has been said tonight. This has been a wonderful debate. I thank the Independents for tabling the motion and my own party for tabling the amendment. I join with Senator Ormonde in asking the Independents, in light of the Minister of State's speech, to withdraw the wording of their motion because everyone is trying to do their utmost. Our distinguished Senator, the former Lord Mayor, gave us the up-to-date position and told us about the three million tourists who visit Dublin each year, making Dublin the third most popular destination in Europe - ahead even of Rome - and the 13 million passengers at Dublin Airport this year.

We come down O'Connell Street every morning on our way to work. There are six sets of traffic lights on O'Connell Street. I call on the new director of traffic for the city centre to ensure those lights turn green in unison so that all the traffic can move. It takes 20 minutes to travel down O'Connell Street in the morning; this is not good. I have mentioned that before in this House. I ask Senator Doyle to bring that to the director's attention to see if it could be addressed. I understand that traders in Dublin city centre pay the highest rates in the country and they deserve the same rights as everybody else.

EU money was allocated in 1991 to the M50, going from east to west. The western section was completed but the eastern section was not. That was not a Government decision but happened because the Rainbow Coalition changed its mind in the local elections of 1991.

I wish to inform Senator Doyle, who is an influential member of the local authority, and the other Dublin local authority members present that in San Diego they open the three lanes to all traffic in the morning and evening, which gives an extra lane to all traffic coming into the city. If that were done in Dublin there would be an extra lane for all traffic on the seven routes to Dublin and it would only take up the time of 14 people. This would help the flow of traffic in the short term.

I agree with Senator O'Toole that the 2,000 hackney cabs should be allowed use the bus corridors when they have their plates displayed.

Mr. J. Doyle: They will be.

Mr. Cassidy: I welcome that announcement by Senator Doyle that that will happen. I hope it happens before Christmas.

Mr. Cosgrave: I wish to share my time with Senator Henry.

An Cathaoirleach: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Cosgrave: I welcome this debate and the Minister of State, Deputy Dan Wallace, back to the Chamber. With no disrespect to him, there was an element of pass the parcel about his speech this evening. If there had been good news, Minister Dempsey, Minister O'Rourke or the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, would have knocked down the door to get in here.

Mr. Costello: Hear, hear.

Mr. Cosgrave: While the motion is rather bland, it sums up the frustration of many members of the public. The omnibus amendment tabled by the Government is only short of mentioning Christmas special offers. While there are many-----

Mr. Costello: Goodies.

Mr. Cosgrave: -----goodies in it, they resemble more what one would like for Christmas than what one will actually get.

I used a quality bus corridor recently and I agree with Senator Doyle that it is working in some areas where it has quickened traffic. We are not all like Senator Doyle, who has a bus stop outside his door; some of us have to travel a little further to one. However, having said that, the concept is right.

The main issues in regard to public transport are its availability, efficiency, punctuality and affordability. Addressing the issue of ticketing could speed up bus and DART transport. A man collects tickets in the DART station, as was the case 20 or 30 years ago. In many other countries one puts one's ticket in a machine operated exit. That must be examined. Tickets should also be transferable between different modes of transport, where one could use the same ticket to travel one way on the bus and come home on the DART.

One negative aspect of the QBCs is that while the QBC is working on the Stillorgan Road, part of the problem has been shifted to the Rock Road. Traffic is going down Mount Merrion Avenue, Booterstown Avenue, Woodbine Road and other roads. The downside is that while some people are leaving their cars at home, others are just not using the Stillorgan Road. That must be examined.

My main complaint relates to the fact that while Dublin Corporation is encouraging people to leave their cars at home by providing QBCs and clamping, if one is not on a direct public transport route one has to get home by taxi. It is that time of the year again, when in the old days one would talk about the weather, now one would talk about traffic and taxis. This evening's paper states, "More taxis on the way - Government to take urgent action". This is an exclusive from Mary Carr. The new millennium programme indicates that the Government will go to 2002, which was noted first by some of us here. The article states, "The Tánaiste is furious that many visiting businessmen to Dublin cannot get a taxi to the airport at certain times of the day." What about the others who need them at night?

It also seems that the radical plan is a major turnaround for the strong Fianna Fáil lobby determined not to interfere with the status quo. One Deputy on the north side obviously must have a major shareholding in a taxi company and it appears that others have also, including perhaps some high up in the Fianna Fáil Party. I hope that the resolve of the Progressive Democrat Party will lead to action.

I will believe in the existence of these taxis when I see them. Senator Ridge said earlier that she will probably be retired before she sees some of the things. She is being optimistic - it is more likely she will be underground, unfortunately.

Dr. Henry: I thank Senator Cosgrave for sharing time with me. It is well recognised that during the school term the traffic anywhere becomes much worse. A greater effort should be made to address the situation of school children travelling to school. The number of children driven to school has increased enormously and for several reasons. People are anxious about their children's safety on the roads due to increased traffic and there is a fear abroad that their children may meet people with undesirable views on how to deal with small children. This must be firmly addressed.

It is desirable for children to walk to school and it is well known that it is a healthy form of exercise for children. It is a great pity it is not promoted. I was sorry that the walking bus scheme got such short shrift in September because with better organisation and consideration regarding insurance and so on, an effort could have been made to get a few pilot schemes going. Many parents had great concerns regarding the lack of attendance at crossings where there was considered to be a danger to children from traffic. It is not enough to have lollipop ladies or men near the school. If parents consider they should be in other locations as well, they should be put there so that children can cross safely.

Something should also be done about the number of drivers who go through red lights, which is outrageous. I have to leap aside sometimes to get out of their way and to expect small children, who think people are going to obey the rules, to get out of the way, is really impossible. Something should be done about that problem.

The shortage of taxis is of great concern. There should be more taxis but more should be done to regulate those who are driving taxis. I cannot be the only person in the Seanad who was horrified to find that the man who was convicted of the Miss X sex offence case was driving a taxi and this was known to the police. If parents are not assured about the people who are driving the taxis into which their children get, they will not allow them be taken in taxis. This might prevent people letting their children walk in one direction to school and, if they are late in school, coming home in a taxi. A great effort should be made to regulate not just those who have the taxi plates, but also those who drive the taxis. I do not suggest that people who have committed a crime can never earn their living again but those with sex convictions are quite unsuitable for driving taxis.

Mr. Kett: I welcome the Minister and thank him for attending the debate on a topic very dear to the hearts of Dublin city councillors in particular. Generally the extent of the challenge faced in Dublin in addressing the traffic problems can best be gauged by considering the DTI strategy report which was drawn up in early 1990, published in 1994 and adopted by the Government in 1996. The strategy at the time enjoyed broad political and public support and its aims were to tackle, in an integrated and comprehensive way, the traffic problems as they were known then. The experience since that strategy was adopted has not been very encouraging, primarily because the forecasts on which the strategy was based at the very outset have proved to be totally pessimistic. The demand for travel in the city has grown in such a way that it was probably impossible for the people devising the strategy at that time to anticipate the economic growth, the boom that was to hit the city and the consequential problems, traffic and otherwise.

However, the pace of implementation of key infrastructural elements of the DTI strategy report has also been very slow. Various Senators have referred to the delays brought about by individuals objecting to various elements of projects on matters that were probably dear to them in some ways but which in other ways were holding up the whole project. While many of these people were very genuine, there were others, who could be described as cranks, who object to everything. Others use some of these objections to launch themselves into political careers. All of them tend to hold up the process and consequently projects such as the light rail system, Dublin Port Tunnel and the C-ring motorway have all been delayed to an annoying extent by those people and other elements.

The consequences of recent trends in traffic growth are evident on the streets. Senators come into the Seanad at the tail-end of those going to work at 8 o'clock and 9 o'clock in the morning. We catch up with these traffic jams at 10 o'clock and again going home in the evening at 7 o'clock. This problem should be addressed, as well as the environmental consequences of all that traffic.

The most serious long-term consequence of traffic congestion is lack of competitiveness for Dublin. If people arrive into work exhausted and late and arrive home late in the evening, then productivity is going down, which has consequences for the competitive nature of the city.

It would be unfair to describe the situation as all doom and gloom. It is far from it. Significant progress has been made, not only in the major infrastructural projects but also perhaps more importantly in the range of traffic management measures that have been implemented in the city. Dublin Corporation would not be as far advanced in its traffic management abilities were it not for the delays I have just mentioned. They found themselves in a situation where they had to address traffic management in order to address the short-term problems being experienced.

The quality bus corridors have been a major contributor to alleviating some of the problems. The Stillorgan quality bus corridor, which was launched in August 1999, has seen a doubling already in the number of passengers in morning peak hours. That is an indication that people are deciding that the car is no longer the only way to travel into the city and that the bus is now matching the car as an option. The combination of on-street bus priority measures implemented by Dublin Corporation and the other local authorities and the service enhancements being implemented by Bus Átha Cliath have contributed greatly. The Stillorgan and Malahide quality bus corridors and the Finglas corridor which will soon be opened complement the good work done by Dublin Corporation. Taxis and hackneys were maligned by some speakers but progress has been made in this sector. An additional 750 taxi licences have been issued and the number of hackneys has increased from 2,500 to 4,000. This is a major contribution to solving the traffic problems.

Transport is critical for people with disabilities. This is a hobby horse of mine but I wish that those with disabilities were able to contribute to traffic congestion. Unfortunately, they cannot travel in this city. Education, shopping and socialising involves travelling but people with disabilities cannot take part. If he takes nothing else from this debate, I hope the Minister of State will agree to examine how those with disabilities can contribute to the traffic congestion.

Mr. Costello: I agree with Senator Kett's final point on access to transport for those with disabilities. Some speakers have castigated this motion as being bland, but it is a pertinent motion as it raises issues which have not been addressed by the Minister of State and other speakers. The motion "condemns the Government for its failure to take effective emergency measures". It does not mention long-term measures, nor what the Minister of State calls the short-term action plan. When one looks at this it is not a short-term action plan in terms of effective emergency measures. The Minister of State did not address the motion.

The Government's ludicrous amendment includes a wonderful bunch of Christmas goodies which are totally aspirational in terms of addressing the problem. I am sure the Independent Senators will not accept this amendment which I find totally unacceptable. Every speaker has acknowledged that there is a crisis of congestion at peak hours but I do not see any measures to address this from the Government.