We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Joint Committee on Infrastructure and National Development Plan Delivery

Business of Joint Committee

Summary

The committee approved the minutes and postponed detailed consideration of correspondence until the next meeting, including a wastewater issue from Waterford and a lengthy NTA reply on transport queries. Members were asked to review the NTA material in advance so specific points could be addressed later.

Sean Fleming An Cathaoirleach Fianna Fáil

Apologies have been received from Senators Cathal Byrne and Stephenson and Deputy Réada Cronin.

I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

The first item on the agenda today is the minutes of the meeting of 17 December, which have been circulated. Are they agreed? Agreed.

The next item is correspondence. There are just two key items. Correspondence has been received from Rory O’Shea, Sweet Briar estate, Tramore, County Waterford, regarding wastewater infrastructure for rainwater and domestic wastewater. In the email, Mr. O’Shea asks whether the committee could make appropriate suggestions to the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, and the Minister regarding drainage systems, assessment, management and planning, periodic inspection programmes, and reporting to the CRU. Attached is the response from the freedom of information request Mr. O'Shea received last year from Uisce Éireann. We previously raised this matter with Uisce Éireann and I understand a substantive reply is being prepared. In an effort to ensure the committee makes every effort to address Mr. O’Shea’s issues, I propose that we await the reply from Uisce Éireann and consider the matter further when we see its content.

The next item is a letter with additional information requested from the National Transport Authority, NTA, at the meeting of 17 December. What I wish to say about the letter, and this is as much for the public as members, is that we raised many issues with the NTA and there is a detailed reply of about seven pages dealing with whether the Kilcock extension will be approved and announced. Senator Stephenson had asked, in connection with the plans, for a platform extension at the Kilkenny train station. The issue of the provision of an early train service from Wexford was mentioned, as were additional late-night services from Portlaoise. Late-night trains for further destinations in County Clare were also mentioned. The NTA was asked to provide a note outlining the cost of putting on late-night trains, whether the timetable will be upgraded to include the stop at Ballybrophy, County Laois, and whether a bus stop at Farranfore will be moved 100 yards down the road to the train station. The local authority funding for a wheelchair-accessible bus stop was also raised.

The next part concerns how a decision is made as to whether a bus shelter can be installed. There is a reply on the list of programme works for footbridges across the country and information on how the free travel subvention is broken down.

There are 13 very specific questions with replies. We could spend the evening going through them, so I ask members, in advance of the next meeting, to have a thorough read of them. I will postpone dealing with this item of correspondence to let members examine it in detail. If members want to raise particular points, they may do so at the next meeting. We could spend a lot of time on it if we dealt with it now and there are representatives of three bodies waiting to come in. Is the postponement of dealing with the correspondence until the next meeting agreed? Agreed.

Comment on this