Deputy Munster wanted to clarify a matter from earlier.
No Main Heading
It relates to the confirmation of the next meeting that the Minister attends relating to the governance of State bodies, that it would be on the agenda.
I wanted to confirm that for the minutes.
Provided that the committee does not get legal advice. I will be there and I am happy to take it.
I propose that we take the Minister's opening statement as read because we have to be out of this room at 1.15 p.m. and if there is a vote, it might shorten things. Each member has seven minutes for their questions including answers, so they should be as brief as possible.
I welcome the Minister and thank him for his opening statement. I know from his comments that he is committed to working with the Minister for Social Protection on the funding of free travel scheme. Can the Minister confirm that there will be no threat to the free travel scheme and no reductions to it and that he plans to expand the scheme to all commercial operators?
What was the last part?
That the Minister is planning to expand the scheme for all commercial operators.
On the question of there being any threat to free travel, there is none. Emphatically none. There is no threat whatever to free travel, I have no intention of altering that in any way.
There will be no reductions.
No reductions.
Is the Minister planning on expanding the scheme to all commercial operators?
As the Deputy will know, there has been an ongoing discussion between my Department and the Department of Social Protection on this matter. That continues but is nearing completion. A principle has been agreed that all commercial bus operators, including Expressway, should be treated the same regarding the methodology used for compensation for participating in the scheme. As I speak, the officials in the Department of Social Protection are broadening their examination to consider other aspects of the scheme's funding arrangements. I have mentioned this to the committee and members will be aware that the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, and I had previously instructed our officials to examine the funding arrangements associated with the free travel scheme. It is open to all private operators to participate in the scheme, as members will know, and I encourage them to do so.
I would emphasise that the decisions on the funding of allocations will be made as part of budget 2018. Interdepartmental meetings are ongoing on the matter and will continue. There is a meeting on this scheduled in two weeks. The committee should be aware that on PSO services, any shortfall in free travel funding is effectively made up through PSO funding and fare revenues so while there may be a shortfall from a particular source, there is no net shortfall in current overall Exchequer funding.
I welcome the Minister's commitment that increases to the PSO services are being worked on by his Department. Where should these increases be focused most?
The increases are quite satisfactory. They have gone up over recent years and will continue to do so. They should be focused most where they are most needed. I am conscious that some rural communities feel that they have been neglected or deprived in recent times. My opinion is not that important because that scheme is run by the Department of Social Protection and the NTA has an input as well. Politically, we should be conscious that there is a need for rural areas which feel that they are isolated to be serviced by the buses. It is something that we as politicians should be aware of. There are non-commercial areas and they must be looked after. New services are an obvious focus but this is mostly a matter for the NTA. However, I am conscious that there has been much discontent in rural areas where people were worried - wrongly worried - particularly during the dispute that they might become isolated but the connectivity has been assured in all those cases.
On the development of the national planning framework, can the Minister tell this committee what plans his Department is making regarding this framework and what he sees as the most important areas to be focused on from the perspective of transport?
The most important thing from a transport point of view is to co-operate on housing and because the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government is leading in this area, look at where it intends to build new houses. From our position, wherever housing expands, we must look at those areas and expand in those areas. When housing density increases, it affects transport and it is very important that any new estates or developments are serviced by transport. That is the most important area. Where the houses go, we follow.
I thank the Minister for staying on for the full meeting.
I reiterate my support for the workers. They have taken some difficult decisions in the long-term interest and sustainability of Bus Éireann. Some of those decisions would not have been necessary had corrective action been taken by senior management at Bus Éireann, its board and the Department when it became patently obvious a number of years ago that serious financial issues faced the company. Are there consequences for the people who failed to take corrective action or decisions and who allowed this situation to develop over a 24-month period?
The Minister promised to establish a multi-stakeholder forum if the Labour Court recommendations were accepted. They have been accepted, so I am disappointed that the forum has not been established, given its importance. Will the Minister give a definitive timeframe for the forum's establishment? Who will its members be? Will the Minister fulfil his commitment to meet the unions before the forum is established? Will the private operators, who have a role to play, be a part of the forum?
I understand that there are two pension schemes across the CIE Group. One is performing well and the other is performing not so well. Do these schemes have outstanding liabilities and will that have long-term consequences in the form of the possible removal of funding from front-line services?
There is a commitment to privatise 10% of routes and I understand that this process has commenced. Is it the Minister's intention to restrict this level to 10%? I would not have imagined that he would need his officials to advise him as to whether it was his intention. Does he concur with one of the potential leaders of the Fine Gael Party, the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Varadkar, who said during the course of his campaigning for that leadership that he would like to see Bus Éireann 100% privatised?
While school transport falls under the Department of Education and Skills, it is administered by Bus Éireann. The anecdotal evidence being given to my constituency office - some of my colleagues might bear this out - is of an attempt to reduce the size of buses, thereby discommoding a number of people who are using them on a discretionary basis. If the number of people who are entitled to avail of school transport based exclusively on the nearest school rule is decreased, those students who have availed of it on a discretionary basis over the years are being forgotten, and that is not fair. Will the Minister examine this matter further?
There are three minutes remaining to reply and I must move on to Deputy Munster afterwards, so the Minister should answer as briefly as he can.
I will take the questions in order. I agree that it was a painful strike for some people and that difficult decisions were made. I pay tribute to all sides on reaching an agreement, including the trade unions, employers, the WRC and the Labour Court, where significant efforts and sacrifices were made. That should be acknowledged. It was very difficult for certain people to accept it and they were faced with a difficult situation. I salute them for being able to reach an agreement.
Regarding the issue of a multi-stakeholder forum, it was only last Monday week that the result of the ballot was known. I have every intention of setting up that forum and keeping to that pledge.
What is the timeframe?
I will give it, but because I want to answer the questions chronologically, I will first answer the Deputy's question on the unions. Of course I will meet the unions. I received letters from three of them last week. Those have been acknowledged and I will write to them in the next day or two to invite them to meet me. That will be an open agenda. I will discuss with them what we plan to do in terms of the stakeholder meetings. I have in mind the idea - it is open to suggestion - that we should have a large meeting with all of the stakeholders. I do not know exactly when, but once we have decided on a format-----
Would it involve the NTA?
Yes. It would include the private commercial operators, trade unions and employers. We would be delighted to include members of this committee. I will not list everyone, but it would also include transport economists. We would be happy to have that. I will not delay it, but we want to set up something that is meaningful and will feed into the consultation process and review of transport policy. They must have that input, so we want them to have it. I promised that I would do it, so I will.
Regarding the pensions issue, I believe that the CIE Group is in discussions with trade unions at the WRC as we speak, but I can check for the Deputy.
I have no plans to increase the 10% level of privatisation. Doing so would be provocative and I have no intention of being provocative despite the fact that Deputy Troy might like me to be. The 10% level is what we have decided and that is where we intend to stay.
I will examine the school transport issue.
The Minister might revert to me on it.
I am not familiar with the problem, but I will examine it.
Many of my questions have been asked. I was going to query the details of the promised review and its terms of reference. When the Minister refers to "all stakeholders"-----
I am sorry, but the terms of reference of what?
Of the review that the Minister will carry out and his engagement with all stakeholders.
Regarding the review of the capital plan, the Minister spoke about providing an infrastructural roadmap for what the transport network will look like over the short and medium terms. I am seeking information on this, so perhaps the Minister could forward us the details.
Who are the stakeholders that will be involved in the upcoming review and talks? Bus Éireann obviously will be, and I presume that Iarnród Éireann and Dublin Bus will be as well, but who else among transport providers does the Minister intend to invite?
Regarding the Department of Social Protection and the free travel pass, the Minister stated that he had committed to working with the Minister for Social Protection on examining the level of funding for the scheme. However, he did not commit to increasing that funding.
In three months in the run-up to the dispute, it was made clear that part of the contribution to the loss making in Bus Éireann was a lack of subvention and subsidy of the free travel pass. From my recollection, I understand the figure was 46% which was far short of what it should have been. Therefore, it played its part in contributing to the financial losses of Bus Éireann.
The Minister's statement on the free travel pass is somewhat watery. He does not give a commitment to increasing funding for it. He said he will examine it, but surely at this stage, in particular if he is holding a review and meeting all of the stakeholders, he has something more to bring to the table than a statement that he is examining the matter. I imagine the Minister has examined it already and spoken to the Department of Finance.
The Minister knows that there needs to be a drastic increase in the PSO subvention. It was part and parcel of the talks. While I acknowledge that there was an increase this year, it is minuscule. If we are to return to the subvention levels of 2008 and protect and preserve our public transport, further increases are needed. Is there any indication of that, given that the Minister is going into the review with all of the stakeholders? Does the Minister have any good news in regard to funding levels and subventions? He knows substantial amounts of money are required.
The Minister has about three minutes left to respond.
I will answer the first question about the players in the stakeholder area. There is no intention to exclude anybody who is an interested party. I would anticipate all of the employers in the semi-State transport area, including private operators, should be there, as well as the State, politicians, all the unions, the NTA and others who are interested parties in that area. I do not want to exclude anyone. If the Deputy wants to suggest I have left someone out, I am quite happy to consider-----
I was curious about whether Bus Éireann and Iarnród Éireann were involved, or whether private operators and-----
The transport portfolio is a big beast and has to include virtually everyone. There is no agenda, if that is what the Deputy means. It is something trade unions have specifically required and it is a specific response to them. That is why it is being done. I promised this during the industrial relations dispute and I am going to keep that commitment. There is no intention whatsoever to exclude anyone.
I referred to the free travel pass.
The issue there is very simple. We have agreed a principle. The payment of free travel is a matter for the Department of Social Protection. We agreed a principle that funding for all commercial operations would be the same. The effect of that is what the Deputy wants to know. It means that there will be an increase in funding for Expressway. It will now receive the same as any other commercial operation, in other words, an increased subsidy.
It will be brought up to the level that some private operators have been-----
It would be exactly the same.
That is not addressing the issue. Even if it is brought up to that level, in the first instance there should never have been a difference between the amount given to public transport and private operators. If it had not come to the fore during committee discussions, I suspect it would never have been changed. That does not address the fact that even if the amount is increased by a minuscule 3% or 4%, it is insufficient. The Minister knows that the fact the subsidy was so low contributed to the loss making in Bus Éireann. Funding needs to increase substantially, in particular in our public transport network.
We are going to remedy that. That is the whole point.
No, the Minister is just going to make things even. He will create a level playing pitch and correct a wrong that was done. He will not address the need for an increase in the subsidy for the public transport network.
We are going to bring it up to a certain level. Expressway will get more as a result.
The Minister is playing with words.
I am not.
Expressway will receive a little bit more because the Minister is going to level the subsidy between private operators and the public transport network, but the Minister is not increasing the subsidy. All he is doing is levelling it out.
Information came into the public domain to the effect that private operators were receiving more of a subsidy for the free travel pass than our public transport network. That is what the Minister is addressing. He is not addressing the overall issue of the subsidy. Even if this issue is being addressed, the subsidy being granted is nowhere near what is needed for our public transport network. That has directly contributed to the loss-making situation, for which the workers have taken the rap.
I must move on to Deputy Barry because time is limited.
I will respond to Deputy Muster because it is important. She is being somewhat unfair. She may be right about what she said about things having been wrong before. I will not concede the point, but I understand what she is saying. We are remedying the situation, which should be acknowledged.
I have committed to increasing the PSO. That is an absolute commitment. The Deputy might acknowledge that this year's increase was greater than that for which her party called in its budget submission. That is pretty good.
I was on my way to work and called into my coffee shop. The chap who owns it asked me what I was going to be doing today. I told him I was going in to Dáil Éireann to ask the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, a few questions. He said to me: "Shane Ross? That fella used to be a communist with the Sunday Independent." I explained that he used to be a columnist with the Sunday Independent. He said: "Yes, that is what I told you. He used to be a communist with the Sunday Independent." I left it at that and went away thinking that if he was a communist or socialist, we would be in a better position with regard to Bus Éireann than we are at the moment.
The Minister kicked off his remarks by making a couple of brief comments about the recent dispute. I do not intend to dwell on that, but I will make a couple of brief points. I am sure the Minister is well-informed about the situation, but I will outline the position just in case. There is not a single bus driver, to my knowledge – I know a lot of them – who voted in favour of the package because they felt it was a positive option for them, their families or the future of the company. Without exception, the men and women I know who voted for it did so because they felt that a gun had been put to their heads. They felt that the threat of examinership was so serious that this time there was no alternative but to vote for the package. That was the feeling among employees.
I compliment all of them on the stand they took. The pay cuts and pension situation would have been significantly worse if they had not taken that stand. It is to their credit that they fought their corner so well. I will leave those points there.
I am not sure whether when the Minister says that proposing to put more than 10% of the company's services out to tender is extremely provocative, he feels that the Minister for Social Protection's comments were extremely provocative because the Minister for Social Protection has made his position clear on that. The Minister might like to clarify that point.
On the immediate issues, in respect of funding for PSO, the Minister says we will see the colour of the money in budget 2018. We will watch that with great interest. On the question of free travel, the Minister says that this examination is ongoing but an important principle has already been agreed that all commercial operators, including Expressway, should be treated and compensated in the same manner under the scheme. I am asking the Minister to clarify that. Discrimination in favour of the private operators over and above Bus Éireann in terms of the way that scheme is administered exists. Can the Minister confirm that he is suggesting that this discrimination be ended? That would be welcome but I would like to hear that point clarified.
When we were discussing the free travel scheme during the dispute-----
We must leave time for answers.
-----the Minister gave the strong impression that his Department was very close to finalising a deal with the Department of Social Protection. The Minister never said it was within days or weeks but the strong impression was given that it would probably be within weeks. What we are being told here is that the news will be unveiled in the budget. The budget is a long way off. Can the Minister give any indication that there might be positive news relating to the free travel scheme well in advance of the budget? I would like some feedback on that.
The Minister has spoken about the forum previously and mentioned it verbally today but in the material, he speaks about talking to the unions in the next few weeks. He talks about a dialogue with stakeholders later in the year. Can the Minister confirm that what he has in mind is not a once-off dialogue but a forum which will meet on a regular basis and include the representatives of the workers who run the company and that there will be full representation for unions at that forum?
There is just over a minute left for reply so if the Minister cannot answer, he might be able to furnish the committee with written responses.
I will try to get through it as quickly as possible. For someone who said he was not going to address the subject of the dispute, Deputy Barry did pretty well. He spoke about it for four minutes. I will try to restrict myself. Along with Deputy Barry, I compliment those bus drivers and other members of staff in all stations and jobs who suffered during the strike. I compliment them on coming to a very hard decision. That should be acknowledged. They made a very difficult choice and I join with Deputy Barry in saying "well done" and thanking them for putting the Bus Éireann buses back on the road and facilitating the travelling public and taxpayer.
Deputy Barry can watch with interest the funding for PSO. It is certainly my intention that it will be raised this year and Deputy Barry can come back to me if he is still there and I am still here in December or November and tell me whether I did or did not deliver on what I said was going to happen.
In respect of free travel, we have agreed in principle that funding for all commercial operations will be the same. That is a fundamental change that is an agreement in principle. There are a few loose ends to be tied up. It might not be announced in the budget. It might be announced beforehand. I must talk to the Minister for Social Protection about when the details will be announced but they will be announced fairly soon. They will be implemented in the budget.
In respect of the dialogue with shareholders, I will meet the unions. I want to meet the unions-----
What about the discrimination against Bus Éireann?
I must wrap things up.
There is a big private operation-----
Can I answer this question first? It is not discrimination apparently. I do not think it is discrimination. I think there is a different methodology, which I will probably furnish the committee with, for working out how much Bus Éireann is paid and how much the private operators are paid.
I will keep that pledge on the dialogue with stakeholders. I will meet the stakeholders in a forum and we will take it from there. Certainly there will be one meeting. I am going to meet the unions. If the unions want more meetings in the future, I would be very happy to meet them as long as there are no industrial disputes.
We must wrap up for the broadcasting team. I thank the Minister and his officials for attending.
The joint committee adjourned at 1.15 p.m. until 9 a.m. Wednesday, 12 June 2017.