I welcome Mr. Fred Barry, chairperson designate of the National Transport Authority, NTA. For his information, there are questions to the Minister for Health ongoing and we will have a couple of members in and out. There is also a committee meeting on the eighth amendment. Notwithstanding our importance, members will be in and out. Apologies for that.
National Transport Authority: Chairperson Designate
Mr. Fred Barry
I understand.
I must read the privilege note. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the joint committee. However, if they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.
Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
I now call on Mr. Barry to make his address.
Mr. Fred Barry
I thank the Chairman and committee members for inviting me to appear before the committee this afternoon.
The overarching objective of the National Transport Authority, NTA, as set out in its act of establishment, is "the development of an integrated transport system which contributes to environmental sustainability and social cohesion and promotes economic progress". The NTA has a wide range of specific functions relating to public transport, which may be summarised as: strategic planning of transport in the greater Dublin area; infrastructure development, including developing an integrated public transport network, and providing bus fleets, and cycling facilities; regulatory functions, including the licensing of taxis and hackneys, and the licensing of commercial bus passenger services; procuring subsidised public transport services; managing the rural transport programme; promoting public transport, including integrated ticketing, fares, and information; and various other related functions. It is a wide-ranging remit, and touches on almost everyone's life in one way or another.
My own background includes a decade as CEO of the National Roads Authority so that I come to this position with a reasonable knowledge of the transportation arena, and of the role of the NTA within the State structure. I am also, of course, well aware of the importance of the interface with Members of the Oireachtas and the relevant Oireachtas committees. If appointed chairman, I will encourage the NTA executive to continue its current policy of open communication with elected members.
Ireland's economy, employment levels and population are all growing rapidly. This is positive for the country overall, but the growth in demand is placing a considerable strain on public transport services. There is a pressing need for greatly increased investment in our public transport, and I would greatly welcome any support the committee may be able to offer in securing that investment.
I welcome Mr. Barry before the committee today. I can only apologise that it is so sparsely populated but, as the Chairman outlined, there are competing interests.
Everybody is watching on the monitors.
I have met Mr. Barry on a number of occasions - at the opening of the N52, the opening of the M4, the opening of the M6 - when he was CEO of the National Roads Authority. At that time, there were significant sums being invested in the road infrastructure and one can see the benefits. We are reaping the benefits of it. Certainly, it is much easier to get around the country than it was in the past.
Mr. Barry is now looking to move into a new role. In Mr. Barry's view, is it the National Transport Authority's role to devise or implement policy? Often there is a tendency for State companies, such as Dublin Bus, CIÉ or Irish Rail, to state that they are only implementing the role of the National Transport Authority and sometimes political personnel can deflect matters to the National Transport Authority. My belief is that it is the job of the Members of the Dáil to bring forward policy and it is the responsibility of the National Transport Authority to implement that policy. I would welcome Mr. Barry's opinion on that.
Mr. Barry quite rightly identified that transport faces many challenges, not least the challenge of how to ensure that we have a proper integrated public transport network that will be environmentally friendly, energy efficient, affordable and reliable. I ask Mr. Barry's opinion in that regard, as every Government, be it this one or the next one, will have a limited pot of funding. How does Mr. Barry envisage being able to meet the challenges of public transport from a financial perspective? When he was CEO of the NRA, Mr. Barry used, one might say, quite rightly, public private partnerships to the maximum benefit. Can public private partnerships be used to a greater extent to fund the much needed investment in infrastructure?
Mr. Barry cited strategy planning. One of the big issues we face now is homelessness, the lack of affordable housing and sustainable development in the housing sector. Transport has a pivotal role to play in addressing these challenges and I would welcome Mr. Barry's opinion on that.
Cycling is not often mentioned but anyone who commutes in and out of Dublin city sees the significant increase in the number who have taken up cycling as their preferred mode of transport. Less than 1% of the overall national budget is attributable to cycling. Is that right? Is it sustainable?
I will have to go to ask a question but I will be back.
That is fine. I explained that the Minister for Health is answering questions in the Dáil and different Members must speak.
I thank Mr. Barry for his presentation. Last night I raised with the Minister the issue that there are almost 93,000 households in rural Ireland that do not have access to rail, bus, hackney or taxi. That is a hell of a lot of people who face near isolation. What are Mr. Barry's plans to address that?
I also wanted to ask what percentage of the current bus fleet of coaches, in particular, the Bus Éireann fleet, has disability access, whether it be lifts, ramps, etc. I attended a disability rights forum last weekend in Drogheda where it was highlighted that coaches do not have to be wheelchair accessible or do not have to comply with the regulation. If that is the case, why is it still so?
Another issue raised was that the disability access standards on the Enterprise trains are far more up to scratch.
There seems to be a lot more thought put into turning room and the layout, in that when a person in a wheelchair boards the train it is easier for them to manoeuvre and position themselves, in comparison with Iarnród Éireann trains. Has the National Transport Authority examined the Enterprise trains and how they model their disability access? This comes from users and their experiences. Has the NTA done this comparison and if not, why has it not done so and will it happen? I am sure Mr. Barry realises there are problems in this regard.
I also want to ask Mr. Barry about the plans for the further privatisation of bus and rail services. I am sure he will say it is not privatisation and that it is outsourcing. There is not a whole lot of difference between the two. What are the plans, outside of the 10% of bus routes? There is also a lot of disquiet around the Go-Ahead contracts and the fact that given it is using taxpayers money, the public and public representatives cannot have access to the contract. There is concern around decisions for awarding the contract. According to reports, the Bus Éireann tender came in cheaper than the Go-Ahead bid. I believe there are also various reports regarding the Go-Ahead delivery of services. These are conflicting reports but from what we hear they are not all 100%. When will we get sight of the reasons, the costs of awarding the contract to Go-Ahead and why the decision was made to award the contract to Go-Ahead as opposed to our national fleet in Bus Éireann?
Mr. Fred Barry
I will take Deputy Troy's questions first about who sets the policy. It is the Oireachtas and the Minister who set strategic policy. An organisation such as the NTA would certainly have a policy setting role, but that would be subsidiary to the policy set by the Government or the Minister. I cannot envisage any circumstances in which the NTA should be trying to develop or implement policies that run counter to the policies of the Government.
I shall now turn to the issue of public transport and the affordability of investment in the role of public private partnerships, PPPs. As the Chairman is aware, I have had considerable involvement with PPPs in my time with the National Roads Authority. PPPs generally worked well in those circumstances because they allowed us to build roads that otherwise would not have been built. The point is well made that it is cheaper for the State to borrow as the State, than it is for any subsidiary State agency to generate or borrow money through a PPP offering. There is sometimes a question in this regard. If, because of the constraints on a government's fiscal space or EU rules and so on, one cannot borrow the money through national borrowing, then one is looking at whether money could be borrowed effectively through a PPP. In those circumstances, the need for the investment and the return on it would have to be significantly greater than the cost through the PPP. If State funding is available it is lower cost funding to the public than PPP funding.
With regard to the role of transport on housing, I believe the NTA has a particular role. The NTA is responsible for the integration of transport and land use, planning with all the local authorities and the strategic transport planning in the Dublin area. In regard to local authority county or area plans into which the NTA has an input, when the local authority is planning where the housing is to go and how it is to be developed, it is important this is done in conjunction with the NTA so that development of the transport and the housing goes hand in glove and when the housing is developed that there is transport for the people.
Deputy Troy made reference to the increasing numbers of people who cycle. I include myself in that increase. I do not know all the details of the NTA's cycling development plans. I do, however, know they are looking at developing some 200 km of cycle ways in the greater Dublin area. If this is done it will be a significant help in developing cycling. Cycling facilities, especially within urban areas, are at a much lower standard than we would all like them to be. The mingling of heavy traffic and cycling in particular is inherently dangerous. We would all like to see an evolution of segregated cycling lanes with time.
That would be safer.
Mr. Fred Barry
Deputy Munster asked a number of detailed questions. Because I am not actually in the job yet I do not have detailed answers for her on those issues. Where I do not have a detailed response I will get back to the Deputy on it. I shall comment generally on her questions. Providing disability access in public transport is absolutely essential. If there are areas where there is a better disability service provided - such as on the Enterprise - than on other trains then we should certainly examine what can be done to move to the higher standard on those trains.
I am surprised to hear there are coaches being licensed that do not have to comply with the regulations. Because it is news to me I cannot give Deputy Munster a response on that. I expect that, if we are not at the point where all coaches are required to comply with disability access, we are moving in that direction. I would expect that to be the case.
Whether or not a service is to be privatised is a matter for government policy rather than NTA policy. That is a strategic policy position. I am not aware of any. In the interviews I went through, before arriving at this position, nobody raised the question of privatisation with me. That matter is for the Government. I have no particular agenda in that area.
With regard to outsourcing, I believe that competition is very healthy. I spent most of my working life in the private sector, competing for work. That made us more efficient and better at the job. Not everything is suitable for outsourcing but when it is done in the right place I believe it is okay.
Deputy Munster asked also about plans to go outside the 10% level of outsourcing. I am not aware of the plans but again because I am coming in to the job there may be plans about which I am not familiar. As we sit here at the moment I am not aware of anything beyond that.
I am aware that Go-Ahead was awarded the contract for 10% of the bus routes but I do not know the details of the Go-Ahead contract. I do not have the details of past contracts awarded by the NTA. I assume that Go-Ahead won because it met the most economically advantageous tender, MEAT, criteria. I believe we are all aware that under the EU rules for public tenders, the most economically advantageous tender has to govern. Deputy Munster asked why it was Go-Ahead rather than the national carrier. When it is a competitive situation, no matter how much one might want to give it to one party or a national carrier, under the current procurement laws that is not allowed. That is the law as we have it. This does not give the Deputy any details on the contract, but I do not have any details on the contract.
I would like a written response to all of the questions I have asked, including the disability access issue compared to the Enterprise service, the access to coaches, the reasons the contract was given to Go-Ahead above Bus Éireann and if we cannot see details of the contract, why not? This is public money and is a matter of public interest. It is a public tender process and we need to know.
Mr. Fred Barry
I will get written answers to the Deputy.
Absolutely. If Deputy Munster is finished I will call on Deputy Barry and then Senator John Dolan. With respect to Senator Dolan, Deputy Barry had been asking a question in the Dáil Chamber. Deputy Barry was here earlier.
In fairness, Deputy Barry is a member of the family here and I am only visiting. I understand.
How is Mr. Barry? We have a couple of things in common, namely, the surname and the fact that we each have a job to do. I understand that Mr. Barry is coming into a new job. My job is to try my best to be a voice for public transport workers. The question they are asking me is whether Mr. Barry is going to be the privatisation guy.
In fairness to Mr. Barry, he has already said he has no policy in that regard.
The public transport workers I am talking to are looking at Mr. Barry's CV and seeing that he is a non-executive director of Ervia. That rings a bell in their heads because they know Irish Water was a subsidiary of Ervia and that there was a privatisation agenda there, albeit that has been defeated now by the campaign. They also look at his CV and see that Mr. Barry was involved in €3 billion of private investment in roads through public private partnerships. We have a very particular situation in Bus Éireann at the moment and I am going to concentrate in my comments on that. We have a ballot for strike action if the company tries to implement unilateral changes to rosters from next Sunday. This is an immediate situation. I said I would try to be the voice of bus workers and I make no apology for reading a few quotes from bus workers as reported by thejournal.ie on the current situation with rosters. The first is from a bus worker:
"Look, this is all coming from the NTA (National Transport Association)," one source said. "They contact Bus Éireann, Dublin Bus, Luas, etc, and say that Behaviour and Attitudes surveys say we need more services. So you get the NX (Navan Expressway, launched on 19 September) launched to great fanfare. They tell us to provide it. But the company hasn't sat down to see whether or not we actually can provide it. Do we have the buses? Do we have the drivers? The answer is no we don't, and it's knocked the whole applecart in the region.
The second excerpt is as follows:
"Lads are doing 12-14 hour shifts and then being told to walk back to the depot. Fellas are starting to walk out on the job. There's no work life balance now," says one driver. "The company says it wants efficiency," says another. "Well, so do we. But it’s all very well aiming for 84% efficiency in driving. That leaves no room for efficiency in family life. There's no work/life balance. What are the younger drivers with families supposed to do?"
The last excerpt from the article is a short one:
"At any one time Broadstone is short 100 buses per day," one source says. "And on a day towards the end of October there were 45 private operators in use."
The general secretary of the National Bus and Rail Union, Mr. Dermot O'Leary, has said these are oppressive and unworkable conditions. I put it to Mr. Barry that what the NTA has done is set Bus Éireann up to fail. There have been 120 redundancies and trying to organise rosters for new routes, such as the Navan one, means that either the workers are crucified or private operators are brought in or, as is being done now, a bit of both. The unions and the workers, who are the people who drive the buses every day and know more about the running of a bus company than anyone in the management, in my opinion, have put forward alternative suggestions on the way rosters might be organised. Alternative suggestion after alternative suggestion has been shot down and we are now on the verge of a dispute. I put it to Mr. Barry that it looks very much as though the situation has been set up to fail. Is this an attempt to bring Bus Éireann into disrepute in the eyes of the public and to further a privatisation agenda?
Mr. Fred Barry
I cannot make any comment on the detail of much of what Deputy Barry has just said. I will repeat what I said earlier. In the lead up to me being here today, nobody has had any discussions with me about privatisation. If there were to be a move to privatisation, it would be a strategic policy issue for Government. I am not aware of the NTA having a privatisation issue. The NTA has sought and will probably continue to seek outsourcing and competition. Where there are subsidies, the NTA will seek value for money as it will where there is competition for services and that is fair enough. As to whether I was brought in with a privatisation agenda, the answer is "No".
That is very clear.
I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to attend the committee. I welcome Mr. Barry and the opportunity to engage with him. My interest as a Senator, first thing in the morning and last thing at night, is the inclusion of people with disabilities. That is the mandate I sought and, thankfully, the mandate I got. We have a public sector duty on foot of equality legislation to provide public services for all of the public. Ireland has signed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and it is intended to ratify that. It copperfastens the public sector duty towards people with disabilities. The convention contains articles on free and easy access to public transport in all its different domains and modalities. That is where I am coming from.
Like other Members of the Oireachtas, I receive contact regarding, and am very much aware from my work of, issues people with disabilities experience on a pretty constant basis, without over-egging it, of failing to access public transport, whether it is taxis, city bus services, regional bus services and trains. Buses in particular are an issue, including the national bus fleet, Dublin Bus and contracted services. The first and foremost obligation of the chairman of the NTA is around the governance of the organisation. I am clearly stating that part of that governance and its linchpin is that it is a public service for all of the public. It is a stretch to provide that but it is a commitment we have made and, in any event, it is what public services are supposed to be about. I am concerned that places outside Dublin - beyond the Pale, to use that old term - do not get a fair shake when it comes to public transport. There is the issue of the quantum of it but there is also a requirement for the NTA to ensure that it is even handed when making decisions to improve services for people with disabilities.
A young woman of 20, who is a wheelchair user, has come to me. She went through all her schooling and has been supported to go to college. In fairness, the State has put a decent investment into her education. The fly in the ointment for her is that 20 times in 2017 alone, having booked and given advance notice, she was let down either on the outward journey or on the way back. She cannot put her hand on her heart and say to a prospective employer or place where she is doing a project that she will be there for an interview. Mr. Barry knows exactly what I am saying. My point is that public transport is not an either-or thing. It stands between that young woman and the possibility of a future. She either goes one way or back the other way. I am not trying to nag, but it is a critical issue for people. I have given just one example but there are many others. That is why I am passionate and strong about this.
During the Bus Éireann strike earlier this year, Bus Éireann took services off three routes. The National Transport Authority told the world there was no problem with that and sufficient service was provided by private licensed operators. An issue that we stumbled on in this committee-----
Somebody's phone is on or is very close to the microphone.
Mea culpa.
Fear not. It means we can record the Senator properly.
The answer for the Clonmel-Dublin route, up to Dublin Airport, was, at one level, correct. There were sufficient seats to put bums on but all the Bus Éireann buses that were taken off the route were wheelchair accessible and none of the remaining buses was accessible nor were any required, under the licence, to be accessible. Whether the provider is public or private, it is unacceptable, if it is a public service, for the person with a disability who wants to go from A to B to have to worry who the provider is. It should be equally accessible if it is a public service.
That still leaves us shy of the issue of whether those accessible buses would be available as accessible stock on the day of the outward or return journey, which brings us to this issue of the notice period. We can change our minds. Someone could get a phone call tonight that a relative is not well or such, say that there is a bus at a certain time in the morning and that he or she will get it. A disabled person, using a wheelchair, cannot do that but has to wait two days with crossed fingers. That is a huge issue, as is the one of people who are blind or deaf being able to have advance notice of where they are on the journey and what the next stop is. The whole service is patchy in that regard and is not up to the mark. There is a range of issues. I could go on. I think the witnesses get the picture.
Could I ask a question, if it is helpful? In his reply, if information on the policy on those issues is not available today, will Mr. Barry indicate that he will come back to the committee about it? We could have that as a definite item for discussion at our next meeting.
That is very helpful.
I think it is hugely important. I hope I am not interrupting.
People with disabilities have representative organisations. There needs to be a real engagement mechanism between the NTA and those organisations on a regular basis. That fits with what the Cathaoirleach has just said, that if there is a draft plan, people and their representative organisations need to know about it and to be part of helping with the solution. I thank the Chairman and wish Mr. Barry the best of luck in his new role.
Mr. Fred Barry
There is a lot in that. I will arrange for something to come back to the committee about the matter. I will add to what Senator Dolan said at the beginning. The establishment Act for the NTA specifically puts an onus on the NTA to take full account of disability issues and provide for disability. I hear Senator Dolan loud and clear that what we have at the moment perhaps falls short of where we need to be. I will keep that in mind as we go forward and, as the Chairman suggested, I will arrange for the NTA to revert to the committee on the policy issues involved.
I am looking at part of the NTA's website. I am not certain I have the right one, but I think I do. It was last updated in 2013 and talks about policy documents with regard to travel planning guidance for the workplace and for local authorities, but disability is not mentioned. I acknowledge Mr. Barry's commitment to take it up and think we should have a meeting about it once we get his reply, to drive the agenda forward, if he is happy with that. I do not know if he was finished yet.
Mr. Fred Barry
That was it.
I have a couple of questions. I want to acknowledge Mr. Barry's huge knowledge, broad range of talents and his capacity to do the job that he has been asked to do. I am concerned about the future, as he is. The national planning framework for 2040 is hugely important, particularly with regard to investment and transport infrastructure. I understand that Mr. Barry's role includes strategic planning for the greater Dublin area, but he also has a definitive role with regard to regional planning. How do we work on that? Mr. Barry's voice is important. My view is that we will make huge investments in infrastructure shortly that will continue to 2040. Has Mr. Barry views on that?
Mr. Fred Barry
As we both know from experience, the NTA will be submitting and will be involved in the development of the plans, as it has been with regional plans, county plans, national plans and so on in the past. The real crunch comes when it comes to abiding by those plans and their implementation in the following period. We have had national plans before that have been fine and good and have had appropriate aspirations, but have not, perhaps, been followed as well as they might have been. The onus will be on public representatives and on agencies on the public service side to try to ensure that whatever plan is put in place for 2040 is followed. From the NTA's perspective, I will certainly encourage that we do our bit but it will require more than any one agency or individual to ensure that the plans turn into an appropriate outturn.
When that plan is fleshed out a bit more, we will continue to meet with Mr. Barry about the views of the Oireachtas and his own views.
Mr. Fred Barry
The more detailed implementation plans will come.
A problem I have, which I know Mr. Barry will appreciate, is that the greater Dublin area, while it includes County Louth, runs as far as the south side of the town of Drogheda, so we are particularly disadvantaged because we are not in that area. No doubt Mr. Barry would agree with that. As Dublin, the towns and hopefully the cities around it develop, that greater Dublin area definition will change significantly. It must, in some respects.
Mr. Fred Barry
I think the Chairman is right. It is not as if there is an abrupt cliff at the edge of the greater Dublin area and one goes into completely rural areas. One gets into communities that are still closely connected with the greater Dublin area.
A point made to us was the question of, going back to Mr. Barry's National Roads Authority role, an outer orbital route around Dublin. Is that in Mr. Barry's remit?
Mr. Fred Barry
It is not particularly under the competence of the NTA. That would be more an NRA issue. Since I am sitting here, I will say that that orbital route needs to be thought of in many ways as forming connections between towns such as Drogheda, Navan and Trim which would be on the route. The natural organic growth of those as centres should be considered rather than thinking of everything coming in and out of Dublin itself.
There was to be a new port development at the time which would significantly change the pattern of port transport in and out of the city. I appreciate Mr. Barry has not sat at the desk yet but what will his role in that be on all those issues?
Mr. Fred Barry
Issues like the orbital route would be the NRA's concern.
The NTA has a role with regard to the plans themselves.
Mr. Fred Barry
We do.
How will the NTA form those views?
Mr. Fred Barry
As far as I know, the NTA is quite engaged on the national development plan already and I will certainly encourage that engagement. I expect we will discuss our views at board level and have those inputted into the process.
With respect, I have to acknowledge the fact that, and the witness could not have known this, they would have to have been in by last Friday.
Mr. Fred Barry
I expect then that it has been done.
I presume they will be published.
Mr. Fred Barry
I think all submissions are published.
Perhaps we could get a copy of them. We can ask.
Mr. Fred Barry
That is fine.
I thank the chairperson designate, Mr. Fred Barry, for coming here today and engaging so constructively and positively with the committee. We wish him well in his appointment. The meeting is now adjourned.
The joint committee adjourned at 3 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 22 November 2017.