The usual suspects, from well paid newspaper editors to even better paid businessmen, have lined up to attack modestly paid bus drivers for organising a four hour protest yesterday for the protection of public transport in this city and country. The Taoiseach, who is not paid too badly in contrast to bus drivers, was, as usual, found among the chorus of condemnation and said there was no logic to their actions. Where is the logic in the compulsive obsession of the Minister for Transport to privatise one quarter of Dublin's bus services? The EU benchmarking report on European public transport found that Dublin Bus operates in the worst traffic of any EU capital, Government subvention to Dublin Bus is among the lowest in the EU, and we have the lowest ratio of drivers to buses in five major EU capitals and the lowest costs per bus. Where is the logic in handing over one quarter of the capital's crucial public transport service, possibly including garages and facilities, to multinational bus companies based in London, Hamburg and elsewhere? Is €20 billion in repatriated profits not enough to be sent from this country annually?

Is it not the case that the Minister for Transport's right-wing economic thinking is driving this and, despite all logic, is driving the Government to accept the privatisation agenda? Does the Taoiseach not think that the public transport services and the bus service in Dublin is best controlled as a fully publicly owned company, democratically organised and run in the interests of the public and with decent conditions for the workers rather than being handed over to unaccountable multinationals?

The Deputy asked me one question in his contribution: whether I said yesterday that I did not see the logic of the stoppage. I said this. Yesterday's dispute was about the fact that an independent chairman had not been appointed. That is what I passed comment on and that is what the dispute was about. All the other issues the Deputy raised are interesting and I hope they are debated in due course.

The reason I said what I did was because the Minister for Transport met the general secretary of the ICTU and representatives of the CIE unions on 26 January. I was involved in the meetings around this. Arising from that meeting, it was agreed to resume discussions under an independent chairperson. Following this meeting, officials from the Department of Transport were in regular contact with the trade unions regarding the basis for the resumed discussions and the appointment of an independent chairperson, as sought by the unions.

Following the confirmation from the trade unions on Friday, 30 January that they were prepared to re-enter discussions, the Department of Transport and the Department of the Taoiseach jointly approached the Labour Relations Commission on 3 February seeking the nomination of an independent chairperson. A number of issues regarding the role and selection of the appropriate person who would act as an independent chair caused difficulties for the Labour Relations Commission. This delayed the nomination of the independent chairperson until 13 February — last Friday — when Kevin Foley was nominated by the LRC and was accepted by both sides. This was the position when I left my office on Friday last. Even though we had decided to resume talks, the unions decided to proceed with the industrial action. I said that I did not see the logic of this.

Does the Taoiseach accept that the bus drivers were not out for a stroll yesterday but were expressing the depth of their anger at the privatisation plans of the Minister for Transport? Does the Taoiseach accept that bus drivers, especially those in Dublin, work an extremely difficult, stressful and responsible job where, unfortunately, they are open to aggression and violence? Why does the Taoiseach propose a system that will eventually lead to a worsening of conditions, longer hours and pressure on pay? This is the record of private multinational bus companies. Does the Taoiseach not know that privatisation has been a disaster for workers and the travelling public in parts of Britain, for example?

Will the Taoiseach check the Napoleonic tendencies of the Minister for Transport regarding crucial areas of the public service? Will transport workers be forced to have an all-out strike before the Minister and the Government returns to logic?

Napoleon would never have got into the Dublin Port tunnel.

As with most Members, I would be genuinely concerned about the conditions and future of workers in Dublin Bus and other parts of the transport sector. It is for this reason that we should be honest with them and inform them that, for a number of years, the legal view has been that the 1932 Act will be struck down sooner or later — as has happened in other areas — and will open up the transport area to private operators. This is the position and we must tell the truth to transport workers.

To deal with this, we have been trying for some time to have meaningful discussions and much good work has taken place. Most of the trade union leaders recognise the difficulties and know that progress must be made. I am glad to note that a meeting took place this morning between the CIE unions and the Department of Transport to discuss the arrangements for the resumed talks. It is better that these issues are dealt with; otherwise, it is quite clear what will happen in due course. This is the best way of protecting the rights and conditions of workers for the future.