After years of debate since the Platform For Change strategy was first mooted, it's time to get on with building a Metro system for Dublin, writes Martin Cullen.
Frank McDonald's article in The Irish Times of August 28th quotes extensively from an analysis of Transport 21 prepared by Professor Austin Smyth. My department has not seen this report or had any contact with Prof Smyth while he was preparing this analysis. However, I want to comment on the views attributed to him in Frank McDonald's article.
The article claims that the economic case for Metro in Dublin has not been proven and that Dublin's future public transport needs could be met through a combination of bus, Luas and suburban rail.
The strategic case for Metro comes from the Dublin Transportation Office's long-term integrated transport strategy A Platform for Change. This was published in 2001 and provides a robust basis for all the transport investment in the Greater Dublin Area under Transport 21. The work of the Dublin Transportation Office (DTO) also underpins the land use development framework for the capital outlined in the Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area.
As your readers already know, the Metro has been one of the most extensively analysed and discussed projects in recent years. The outline business case prepared by the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) for Metro North shows that there is a good economic case for it.
This was subject to independent reviews by consultants engaged by both the Department of Finance and the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport. The consultant engaged by the joint committee reviewed the RPA's outline business case and agreed that the costs and benefits had been assessed on a realistic basis.
The committee's consultant also concluded that the results of the cost benefit analysis were satisfactory and might even be bettered given the conservative native of some of the assumptions made.
Prof Smyth suggests that a spur off the Dublin-Belfast railway line should have been looked at as an alternative to the Metro serving Dublin airport. In fact, this was looked at extensively and rejected by the Dublin Transportation Office when preparing its long-term transportation strategy.
It was also looked at by the consultant retained by the Oireachtas Transport Committee. That committee accepted its own consultant's conclusion that neither bus nor rail options would provide a satisfactory alternative to the Metro.
Prof Smyth's analysis seems to fundamentally misunderstand the role of the Metro. It is not an airport rail link. It is designed to provide a high-quality rail service along a north-south corridor, meeting existing transport requirements in that corridor, serving the airport and facilitating major residential development in the Swords area. On this latter point, Transport 21 accepted the recommendations of both the Oireachtas Transport Committee and Fingal County Council to extend the Metro line to Swords.
It is also important to understand that Metro North is not an isolated line but the first phase of the extensive Metro network envisaged in Dublin Transportation Office's A Platform for Change. Transport 21 also includes financial provision for Metro West, which will provide an orbital route linking Tallaght, Clondalkin and Blanchardstown and integrating with Metro North.
Before construction of the Metro, or indeed any other major rail project, can begin it will require a railway order. Before a decision on the order is made, the proposal will be subject to a full public hearing before an inspector at which all aspects of the proposed project will be scrutinised in detail. The fundamental transportation and economic case for the project will have to be made. Why the project was chosen over alternatives will have to be justified. Why the preferred route was selected over other options will have to be explained.
The public will have a right to make submissions and to test the arguments being put forward for the project. This statutory process, coupled with ongoing public consultation, will subject the project to full public scrutiny, far removed from the "command and control" by Government so inaccurately described in your recent editorial.
Prof Smyth emphasises that Dublin's bus and rail network should be planned together with a clear strategy for interchange. I wholeheartedly agree with him and I have been making this very point at every opportunity since Transport 21 was announced last November. The whole basis of Transport 21 in Dublin is the development of an integrated network with regular opportunities for planned interchange across the public transport system.
Just take the example of Metro North. There will be provision for interchange with Luas and suburban rail (via the interconnector) at St Stephen's Green, with the Maynooth and Navan rail lines at Drumcondra and with Metro West at Ballymun. A look at the Transport 21 map for Dublin shows that interchange is a core part of the investment strategy.
We have two choices in relation to the development of the transport system in Dublin. We can get on with the implementation of the investment programme set out in Transport 21 which is supported by the DTO strategy and the analysis of the various transport agencies. Or we can continue to debate how to tackle our congestion problems, leading to paralysis by analysis.
It is my strong belief that we have had enough debate over the past 10 years. What we need to focus our energies on now is the delivery of the Transport 21 programme on time and on budget. Future generations will not thank us if we miss this golden opportunity provided by our recent economic success.
Frank McDonald's article also refers to Prof Smyth's comments on the development of the mainline rail network. The reality is that the rail network was on its knees before this Government began a major reinvestment programme in 1999, driven mainly by safety concerns. In the intervening period most of the railway infrastructure has been renewed. Over 400 miles of old jointed track has been replaced with continuous welded rail. New electronic signalling systems have been implemented across the network.
The Strategic Rail Review, completed in 2003, provides an excellent policy framework for the future development of the railways and is the basis for the Transport 21 investment. Transport 21 will continue the renewal of the rail infrastructure, but its main emphasis is on the development of services.
By the end of this year, we will have brand new rolling stock providing an hourly service on the Dublin-Cork route, giving a competitive advantage to the railway well ahead of the completion of the motorway in 2010. A further 150 railcars are on order which will give us one of the youngest rail fleets in Europe. This investment will allow us to improve services on other lines, with a service every hour at peak and every two hours off-peak on the Limerick and Galway routes, services every two hours off-peak on the Sligo, Tralee and Waterford routes and at least four services a day on other intercity routes including Westport, Ballina and Rosslare. Transport 21 is also providing funding for track renewal, resignalling, level-crossings and the removal of speed restrictions, all of which will contribute to improved travel times. We are also committed to the phased development of the Western Rail Corridor and the introduction of new commuter rail services in Cork and Galway.
All this signals a bright future for the railway in Ireland.
Martin Cullen, TD is Minister for Transport