We are meeting with representatives from the National Transport Authority, NTA, and MetroLink for an engagement on the current delivery status of the MetroLink project and any associated issues relevant to the project. I am pleased to welcome Mr. Hugh Creegan, deputy chief executive officer, director of transport planning and investment; and Ms Anne Shaw, chief executive officer, NTA; and Mr. Michael Flynn, interim programme director, MetroLink .

Witnesses 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.

I remind members that they will be afforded a six-minute speaking slot for questions and answers, with a second chance to contribute if they so wish. I also highlight to members that we have a firm finish time today of 6.15 p.m. as there is another committee meeting in the room after us. I invite Ms Shaw and Mr. Flynn to make their opening statements.

I am interim programme director for the MetroLink project, working with Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII. I want to take this opportunity to give the committee an update on where we are right now with the MetroLink project, and to explain what we can expect to see happen in Dublin over the next few months and years.

It is important to note the benefits of the MetroLink project. As a reminder of the physical scale of this project, MetroLink will deliver a 19 km, mostly underground, fully automated railway line. Connecting Swords and Dublin Airport directly to the city centre and Charlemont in approximately 25 minutes, its 16 stations will seamlessly integrate with Irish Rail, DART, Luas, and bus services. With a future peak capacity of up to 20,000 passengers per hour per direction, it will fundamentally transform connectivity, housing growth, and climate action in the greater Dublin area, with operations envisaged in the 2030s. It is going to be up there with Ardnacrusha in terms of its impact on the country.

I am the interim programme director, following on from Mr. Seán Sweeney. As members know, having done excellent work in establishing the project, he returned in June to the southern hemisphere for family reasons. He left the project with a world-class management team and momentum that can be seen both in the progress being made and in the market reaction as we rapidly move through the procurement phase.

MetroLink is moving at pace through active pre-construction mobilisation, procurement and delivery preparation. Our immediate focus is converting this planning certainty into executable delivery contracts. To that end, MetroLink entered a live procurement phase. In Q1 2026, we launched the selection process for bidders on the M401 and M402 civil infrastructure contracts. These two contracts will provide civil engineering and infrastructure works including the alignment preparation, stations and structures including bridges and tunnels all along the route of MetroLink. That was followed in Q2 by the release of the contract notice for the M500 design, build, finance, operate and maintain, DBFOM, and service delivery partner. This contract provides for the design and delivery of rail systems, rolling stock, commissioning, depot and park-and-ride facilities.

It also delivers the fit-out of all stations, including mechanical, electrical and passenger movement systems, and integrated operation and maintenance of the MetroLink service. We also launched the procurement to deliver a major package of work, the M120, for Dublin Airport and Glasnevin. These packages represent the core physical infrastructure of the metro, covering heavy civil engineering and structures. As the procurement processes are live, it is essential that confidentiality is maintained to minimise the risk of procurement challenge and consequential delay to the schedule.

I want to take this opportunity to update the committee on progress, cost and schedule, three things that are very closely linked. As I indicated, we have strong momentum at this point and keeping this pace up is critical to maintaining good cost control. The most recent overall cost estimate for MetroLink, taken from the preliminary business case, is a range of potential capital costs from €7.16 billion to €12.25 billion, in 2021 prices, excluding VAT. It is important to note that this figure is over five years old and does not reflect significant construction industry inflation in recent years, as well as a number of new requirements and commitments that have been incorporated through the railway order process, all of which will influence the updated cost profile.

We have concluded the re-examination of the overall cost forecast model and have submitted a revised business case to the NTA. It is undertaking a comprehensive review of this business case in collaboration with the Department of Transport, and we anticipate a Government decision on MetroLink in the coming weeks.

As this revised business case requires consideration by the Cabinet, it would not be appropriate to discuss the figures until it has received Government sign-off. It is important to note that we have some of the best in the business to assist with revising our cost and time estimates. We have also used industry experts such as Oxford Global Projects to verify our work. As with all major infrastructure projects, both cost and schedule remain estimates until we reach the contract award stage and have a signed agreement with a construction partner. At that point, we will have greater certainty on the figures, and I look forward to returning to the committee to discuss those revised estimates.

In conclusion, MetroLink has reached a critical stage in its development, with a full schedule of indicative milestones as the programme continues to progress towards construction. In essence, the planning phase is behind us, the procurement phase is under way and the delivery phase is soon to commence. The team and I are fully focused on maintaining strict governance and commercial discipline as we push forward with progressive construction activity. I thank the committee and look forward to addressing any questions. If I may, I have one amendment to make to appendix 1 in our submitted document. I used the word "including" for metro north costs, when it should have been "excluding" metro north cost on page 1.

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it today to discuss progress on the delivery of MetroLink. I think the committee will agree this is one of the most significant transport projects being advanced under the national development plan. I am joined by Hugh Creegan, deputy CEO and director of transport planning and investment at the National Transport Authority.

As the committee is well aware, we are at a transformative point in the development of Ireland’s transport infrastructure. Across government and the transport sector, there is a shared commitment to delivering modern, sustainable and integrated transport networks that encourage modal shift by creating more sustainable choices, reducing congestion, supporting economic growth and unlocking housing and regional development through improved connectivity, while meeting our climate objectives. Significant progress is now being made across a wide range of public transport projects, including BusConnects, DART+ and the active travel infrastructure, with MetroLink representing a critical component of that overall programme.

Before turning to MetroLink specifically, I will briefly outline the role of the NTA in relation to infrastructure delivery. The National Transport Authority is the statutory body responsible for the planning, development and funding of public transport and active travel infrastructure, as provided for under the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008. We also regulate a number of elements of the transport system, including commercial bus services and the small public service vehicle sector.

In addition, we act as the approving authority for major public transport investment programmes, including BusConnects, DART+ and MetroLink. In that capacity, we are responsible for approving key decisions throughout the project life cycle in accordance with the Government’s infrastructure guidelines, such as approval to seek planning consent, approval to tender and approval to award contracts, in addition to providing general oversight of the progression of the project by the relevant delivery agency. The sectoral investment plan for transport sets out an ambitious programme of investment, with significant funding committed to public transport over the period 2026 to 2030, alongside additional support for MetroLink through the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund. The scale of this commitment reflects the priority being placed on sustainable transport at a national level.

Turning to MetroLink, TII, will provide the committee with a detailed update on the current status of the project. However, it is important to acknowledge the very significant milestones reached with the granting of the railway order by An Coimisiún Pleanála in October 2025 and its subsequent finalisation in January 2026 following the resolution of judicial review proceedings. This represented a major step forward, providing planning certainty and a clear pathway towards project delivery. Since then, work has focused on advancing MetroLink into the procurement stage and advancing the project towards the next key decision point under the Government's infrastructure guidelines.

In parallel, the Department of Transport, with the support of TII and the NTA, is progressing the establishment of a dedicated statutory delivery body to oversee MetroLink during its construction phase. Government approval has recently been obtained for the heads of Bill of the legislation to set up the new body, and it is hoped that this legislation will be progressed expeditiously through the Oireachtas process.

MetroLink represents a once-in-a-generation investment that will fundamentally enhance the capacity, connectivity and resilience of Dublin's transport network. However, it is only a part of a much wider national programme of transport investment already delivering tangible benefits for communities across the country. While significant work remains ahead to bring MetroLink to completion, we are making steady and tangible progress through the next stages of delivery, building on the significant milestones already achieved. The NTA remains committed to supporting the successful delivery of MetroLink and to ensuring that this major public investment delivers long-term value, enhanced connectivity, greater transport capacity and a more sustainable future for the people of Ireland.

I thank the Chair, and I look forward to engaging with the committee and answering any questions.

I thank the witnesses for the opening statements. We move to questions now. Many people have questions, and new people are joining us as well, possibly coming from other committees because of the obvious importance of MetroLink in general. Significant costs have already been incurred, which is understandable and fine. The questions will be in this regard.

Gabhaim buíochas le gach duine as teacht anseo inniu agus as an obair atá á déanamh acu. There are two aspects to Ireland’s transport system. We live in a slow-motion country in terms of the delivery of infrastructure. Dublin is one of the most congested cities in the whole of the European Union now. This level of congestion is costing hundreds of millions of euro each year. People are living in a commuter hell where they are spending two, three or four hours a day trying to get to and from work. The average speed of vehicles is less now than it was in the 1860s when people used horses and carts to get to work. The Dublin traffic situation is a disaster.

The other element is the super-slow-motion delivery of projects. This particular project was first announced around 2001. At the time, the suggested costs were around €2 billion for the building of this infrastructure. We are now seeing Monopoly money projections in terms of how much it is going to cost, up to €12 billion. Some people are saying it could even go up to maybe €18 billion. My understanding is that the witnesses have come to this committee to tell us they cannot tell us the actual estimated cost of this particular project and that the business case for this project is to remain secret from us at the moment. Is that the case?

We are following the infrastructure guidelines in terms of the steps to develop the preliminary business case, the detailed business case and, ultimately, the final business case.

At the moment, we are in the detailed business case process. We have prepared the business case that outlines the cost and timeframe. That is going through the process in accordance with the infrastructure guidelines. Unfortunately, until they go through the due process and are considered by the Department and, ultimately, the Cabinet, we have to await the approval.

Mr. Flynn will understand the frustration of members in this regard. Well over €400 million has been spent on this already. My understanding is that no physical shovel has been put in the ground yet. If there has been a shovel in the ground, it must have happened very recently in the context of preliminary works. There have been incredible costs. It is estimated that the settlement for the houses at Dartmouth Square will cost something like €30 million. We heard of the purchase of the Carlton site on O’Connell Street which is likely to cost approximately €80 million. Will Mr. Flynn confirm those costs?

All of the arrangements that have been put in place are subject to the contracts that have been in place. Work is also ongoing to try to secure other sites along the alignment. Ultimately, until we get further down the road on those sites, our concern is that we would compromise the negotiations on those other stretches of land by declaring costs.

With regard to the purchase of the Carlton site, is it just the O’Connell Street element or does it include the element on Moore Street?

It is the O’Connell Street element. These sites are being secured to enable construction. The O’Connell Street site will be key for us because it is a very constrained area on an iconic street. By having the land there, it will enable us to take a more efficient approach to constructing the station at O’Connell Street.

There has been a lot of money spent to date on the project. A substantial portion has been consumed going through the planning process, which concluded at the back end of last year. As part of that process, we have undertaken in the order of 200 bore holes to get a geotechnical survey of the site to try to mitigate the risk that contractors will face when they come along to start tunnelling under Dublin. We are trying to minimise and predict the risks they will encounter. Additionally, there is a substantial amount of utility diversions that have to be undertaken to make way for the stations and other structures. Therefore, we have spent quite a bit of time doing those investigations. Again, this is all to derisk the project so that when we start engaging in contracts, we are giving those contractors a greater understanding of the physical environment they are going to inherit.

I imagine the above-street element of the Carlton site will not be needed in the long term for this project. I imagine this project will only need access for construction, and then it will just be the underground element needed when the site is finished.

In order to build the station, we need quite a lot of other land around the specifics of the station because a lot of plant and equipment will be required. Therefore, having additional area-----

I have very little time. My time is running down.

I am sorry.

It will not be needed in the long term.

Once we get into operation, the site will be available to the State for development.

Okay. We do not know how much this project is going to cost. Will Mr. Flynn provide the committee with a timescale of the project? Is it true that the Government is likely to split it into two projects? Is it the plan of the NTA to have two phases to the building of MetroLink?

We will be letting these contracts as one complete system. We are investigating a range of contingency plans as to how and when we can build the project in the event that problems occur on different parts of the line. We are also looking at the possibilities of phased opening to see whether greater benefits can be received earlier rather than waiting until one complete commissioning at the end.

I asked about the timescale. Is there any timescale for completion?

Obviously, there has been the impact of the planning process. Broadly, securing the railway order added two years to the timescales we had envisaged when we were doing the preliminary business case. Those timescales will then get firmed up once we get through the approval process of the detailed business case.

Will Mr. Flynn provide an estimate to Deputy Tóibín’s question, even a rough year?

We are still aiming for the mid 2030s.

Another decade.

Deputy Duncan Smith is taking the place of Deputy Conor Sheehan, just in case any member is wondering why he is speaking second.

I thank the witnesses. As a resident and representative of Swords and Fingal, I am supportive of MetroLink. For us, the project has begun in real terms with the enabling works being carried out in the R132 project in Swords. While those works are not officially part of the MetroLink project, we are now living with the traffic disruption and all that is entailed in that regard. For us, the project has begun and needs to be completed.

I welcome the news this morning of the sale of the Carlton site. It seems like progress. The property group, Hammerson, that owned the site said the State paid approximately €81 million for it. Is that an accurate figure? If it is, is that price over, above or about what the State felt it should be paying for that site?

In respect of the works, we are looking to start enabling works in the Fingal area towards the back end of this year. Utility diversions will be carried out to enable the start of permanent works. Those works are almost within touching distance in relative terms.

With regard to the O’Connell Street site, we have other negotiations ongoing and we cannot confirm at this point.

Despite the vendor announcing a price, Mr. Flynn still cannot confirm whether it is correct.

That is correct.

That does not seem to make too much sense if the deal is done. We are dealing with a big site and we want transparency over the costs. Those of us who are supportive of the project have Senator McDowell writing falsehoods about this project almost weekly in The Irish Times. It would help us to refute those falsehoods if we had more details around how the project is proceeding.

I appreciate that it is frustrating. We have quite a few areas of land along the alignment where we are in negotiations. We are trying to avoid disclosing costs in case it would disadvantage us in other negotiations. Securing the O’Connell Street site is a key step. It is a key piece of property for us. It should enable us to have more efficient construction activity. Ultimately, that will help us in the long term.

Will Mr. Flynn clarify what the Minister, Deputy O’Brien, meant by this kind of two-phased approach? I know Mr. Flynn mentioned contingencies, but for those of us who have been supportive of the project going right through to Charlemont, are we talking about going from Swords to the Carlton site on O’Connell Street first and then maybe going farther thereafter? What did the Minister mean by that because it was a bit of a shudder down the spine moment?

I cannot comment on what the Minister has said but we have explored commissioning and opening up services at locations along the route, including to O’Connell Street. Ultimately, as I said, the contracts that we will be putting in place will be for the whole of the alignment and route. In those contracts, we will be looking to negotiate the optimum solution and arrangement for when we can start service. Ultimately, we are trying to make sure that we get services up and running as soon as possible so that benefits can be realised as soon as possible.

I will get a bit local for a moment. As I said, the R132 project has begun in Swords, which is going to allow the works for MetroLink to begin. We are dealing with heavy traffic and traffic disruption. Public representatives have been dealing with the local council, the NTA and everyone in relation to those works. Obviously, this will continue when MetroLink starts. We are prepared for that.

We are feeling the beginning of this now. Clubs in Swords are being affected. I want to ask in particular about Fingallians GAA Club. It is losing 50% of its pitches in the Balheary area from next year because of the MetroLink works. Other public representatives and I have made representations to TII to work with the council and others to find alternative pitches in the Balheary area. Is there any update on that? Will MetroLink be able to find a solution for Fingallians GAA Club?

There has been quite a lot of engagement with the club. We are exploring a couple of options at the moment. We have another meeting this Friday. The intention is to try to provide a solution that meets everybody's needs.

Will it be close to Balheary?

Yes, I believe so. Ultimately, we are looking to reconfigure how we approach the site to try to maximise the availability of the pitches and come up with a different sequencing.

I want to thank Seán Sweeney, who is now retired, for his work on the project to this point. I also congratulate Michael Flynn in his interim role. He has kept it progressing. We will have moments like this, with obstacles and hurdles along the way, but the momentum of this has continued since Seán Sweeney's time. I look forward to continuing engagement on it.

There is a lot of concern about the spiralling costs. I suppose we do not have full transparency from the Government on the true cost of the project. Some €350 million has already been spent before construction, as has been mentioned. People are entitled to know where this ends because we have seen cost overruns time and again in major projects that the State has been leading on. I appreciate that particular details on the costings in the revised business case cannot be given until approval has been given by the Government. Has Mr. Flynn been given any sense of a timeline for when a decision is expected to be made by the Government on this business case?

We anticipate a decision in the coming weeks. We have a plan in place for what we need to do to maintain the momentum on the project. We have made provision for the time taken to analyse and dissect the detailed business case. We are hopeful that a decision will be made in the coming weeks.

That will be important for transparency around the costings. On the issue of costings, I noticed in the document Mr. Flynn submitted to the Committee of Public Accounts that €3 million was paid to a Dublin central limited partnership for enabling works and design services at O'Connell Street station. My understanding is that company is owned by Hammerson. What works were done as part of these payments?

I can provide the details separately but some design works were undertaken a couple of years ago.

Okay, specifically design works. I am asking because TII has now purchased that site from Hammerson. About €3 million was paid previously, so if we could get more clarity on that it would be appreciated.

In terms of today's announcement, the Carlton site is a historically significant location. Hammerson has plans to develop the wider 5-acre site between Moore Street and O'Connell Street. My understanding of those plans was that the former Carlton site was intended to be the gateway to a shopping centre extending into Moore Lane and Moore Street. This would result in a break to the historic terrace of 10 to 25 Moore Street. I am sure Mr. Flynn is well aware of the deep historical connection that these buildings have with the 1916 Rising and so on. Now that TII and the State are involved in the ownership of this site, does that mean there will be changes to the redevelopment plans Hammerson has? Will action be taken to protect the integrity of this historic site?

Initially, the focus is on trying to make sure we secure the site to enable the construction. Ultimately, as part of that we will be working with Dublin City Council and the associated task force to come up with a masterplan for that area so that the State gets the full benefit of the site after we have completed the construction and that the development resulting from that engagement is the right development that the State can support.

Has TII had engagement with Hammerson on how the MetroLink project and its proposal for the site will work?

There has been some engagement with Hammerson about that. We have not concluded a position on it. Therefore, it gives us the ability to engage with Dublin City Council and the task force for Dublin to look at the options for development.

One other area I want to touch on is the naming of the project itself. I know it is a requirement in the Official Languages Act 2003 for the names and logos of new statutory bodies to be in Irish only. Has consideration been given for an Irish name for the MetroLink project?

This is not something I have familiarity with but I will go back to base and get back to the Deputy with an answer.

That would be appreciated. Like I say, it is a requirement in the Official Languages Act 2003. It is very important that we promote the Irish language at every possible opportunity and that includes Irish placenames in terms of stations and stops along the project. I have been given different examples of options that could be used, such as the literal translation of Metro, which is "Meitreo", or "Anuas", which means downwards. There are many other creative examples so I would encourage the project to promote the use of the Irish language. Sin é.

I will follow on from that by saying tír gan teanga, tír gan anam. Last night we debated the inconceivable position of the leader of Fianna Fáil, in its centenary year, which is that it is not even backing preparation for Irish unity. I want to talk about the Carlton site that was acquired. There was recently a commemoration in Kildare where we have the site of Theobald Wolfe Tone. The 1916 quarter is also a very sacred place for us. It carries the legacy of the still unfinished revolution for a 32-county Irish republic. When he was talking to an Teachta Tóibín, Mr. Flynn mentioned that the Carlton site does not go all the way back to Moore Street. It does go back to Moore Lane, I thought.

It is the 200 m strip along O'Connell Street. We are not stepping back into Moore Street.

Is it going to be part of the revolutionary quarter?

My understanding is that it does not encroach into that part.

MetroLink will not be shaping any part of any wider development on that.

I believe that remains part of the Hammerson lands.

Okay, I just wanted to clarify that.

The witnesses referred to the breakdown and the natural increase due to inflationary impacts. How much of that is going to be the construction impact and how much will arise from the commitments made under the railway order of last year?

The costs that were in the preliminary business case were put together in 2021 and, since then, we have had the impacts of a number of global events, all of which have driven construction costs quite significantly. We have seen quite significant costs, even for diesel, which is used extensively. The cost of diesel has gone up by approximately 70% since 2021, so-----

Does Mr. Flynn have a breakdown of the costs associated with the railway order and the commitments as part of that order?

As part of the detailed business case, those are pulled out.

How much of the project is going to be funded by the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund redirection?

No. I do not know whether-----

There was €2 billion allocated to it in the most recent budget. That is as far as it has gone so far.

Will the witnesses expand on the integration that MetroLink is going to have with other rail services? For example, are there any plans for it to be connected to the DART line in the future?

The current alignment of the project interfaces with some of the critical DART lines we are going to have in the future. One of the stations is at Tara Street, which will allow easy interchange from the current DART network on and off the MetroLink system in the future. Glasnevin station is beside Cross Guns Bridge. There is going to be a major interchange station there, which will allow people to move from DART transport out to Maynooth or, in fact, to Kilcock. The DART trains coming in from the Wicklow line in the future, on DART+ South West, will also interchange there. Those two stations-----

There will be interchanges.

-----give good interchange between the MetroLink project and the DART system.

When might it be expanded towards the southside? Will that only happen through interconnections? Is there any underground element?

In the transport strategy for the greater Dublin area, which we published two years ago, we committed that for the next update of the transport strategy, we would re-examine the future extension of MetroLink, whether to the south west, south east or south. We are going to start that work next year and be able to have a feasibility study finished as an input to that strategy. There is a commitment there to examine extending it further south, but exactly where and exactly what it would be remains to be the subject of a study next year.

I thank the witnesses for joining us. From the outset, I will say that this is a monumental project in respect of the ambition of the country and the direction of travel in which we want to go to build out our capital city. It is also important in connecting the airport and giving it a sense of prominence where we do not have that connectivity at the moment. It is vital.

There has been a lot of talk about the wrongs of trying to identify where the challenges are around figures and monetary values and so on. With the nature of building, there is always going to be an element of cushion required, whether those costs go up or down. The cost inflation piece is a challenge. It is hard to look one year, three years or ten years ahead, but how do we manage that over the next period of time so that we are not constantly having the witnesses before the committee to explain the need for an extra €500 million or an extra €1.5 billion? How do we set the expectation of the country in relation to this project?

We have gone through a process to develop the detailed business case. We have developed and costed a design. We have looked at models for inflation. We have also looked at models around risk and contingency. The business case will represent a core scenario and it then identifies other sums that are calculated based on the likely inflation and the likely risks that are envisaged. We look at global projects that are completed as international benchmarks. We also use something called "reference class forecasting", which looks at a whole suite of projects to extract what those look like. We put a lot of parameters into the models to come up with what the range of costs could be.

It might be useful on a biannual basis that a risk register would be provided to us, as the infrastructure committee, to show what the NTA envisages are the challenges coming down the track; excuse the pun. Chongqing East railway station in China was built under budget in six months. It was the biggest ever project of this scale in the world. There have to be learnings that we can take and best practice examples rather than having surprises. The last thing I want for this project are surprises of any description.

That leads me to my next question. There has been debate at committee or in the Dáil Chamber about the capacity to deliver this project on a granular level, as it relates to the workforce. Where does the workforce reside? How would the witnesses make progress in that regard?

Boring holes are niche tools that are not required for every project. We in Ireland do not bore holes every day of the week. How is the NTA making provision now for the delivery of that so there are not surprises in due course?

We have a team of people engaged who have worked in many areas across the globe. They are bringing their personal learnings to the table. As I said, we also utilise lessons learned from other sources of information from other projects around the world. We also leverage information from the likes of Oxford Global Projects and others in terms of bringing information to the table.

One of the key things we have done is to undertake a study of the capability capacity in Ireland in terms of workforce and supply chain. As part of that, we spent time last year going across Europe and promoting the project to secure interest from global construction companies. They are the people who have access to tunnel boring machines to which the Deputy referred and so on. We have launched procurement for those big construction works and have had a very good level of interest from those global construction companies that have shown an interest in coming to work on MetroLink. That provides a good foundation to drive competition from them so that we will have world leaders in the field coming to do the work.

Okay, so Mr. Flynn-----

In addition, they will require-----

I want to come back in.

I am sorry. In addition, they will require access to a local supply chain for some of the aspects that need to be-----

Mr. Flynn is satisfied that there is adequate competition at all levels of the supply chain.

Bringing in the global players will promote a high level of competition.

That is there. Mr. Flynn mentioned referencing other projects. Can he give me examples of three projects that the NTA is looking to right now as best practice that we can almost copy and paste for delivery of this project?

We tend to look at the lessons learned from those projects that have not gone so well as the primary area because we are looking at what could be the downside.

We are using that as a means of shaping the requirements and to drive those requirements into the procurement process to set the challenge for those global companies that would be bidding for MetroLink to bring forward the methodologies they have used successfully on their projects on a global basis. Ultimately, we are at the point now of buying the capability to build the job.

I just want to make a point on that register from a risk perspective. I officially ask for that to be provided.

Yes. That is a good point. That is fair.

I thank the witnesses for coming in today. A lot of the issues I was going to tease out with the witnesses have been discussed but I want to talk for a moment about what it will actually look like, on the ground, for somebody who wants to get on the metro. If I am in Dublin city centre, where will the first station be?

In Dublin city centre, coming from the south you would get on in Charlemont. The layout of the stations will include accessibility for passengers with reduced mobility so there will be access via lifts and there will also be escalators. In terms of the passenger experience, passengers will be able to utilise escalators or lifts to access the platform level. There will be a good level of natural light available within the station. Ultimately, when the passengers descend to the platform level, they will be met with a platform screen door separating them from the train. It will be an automatic train. When the train arrives, the platform screen door will open, as will the train door, and passengers will be able to access the train and ultimately go forward on their journey, whether that is to the airport or-----

If they are going to the airport, will the first station be underground?

The first station will be underground, yes.

Will the entire journey be underground then?

The train comes out from underground just before the M50. There is a viaduct that goes across the M50 and it will then go to Dardistown where the depot-----

Is that over or under?

Over. It is over the M50. It will then go to Dardistown and start to dive under the airport. There will be a tunnel lane going under the airport. The passengers will then arrive at the airport station and escalators and a lift will be available at the airport station to get them up into the airport.

At the airport, will the metro arrive at terminal 1 or terminal 2? Where will it come out?

The location is just in front of terminal 1 and terminal 2. It is adjacent to the Uber pick-up area, if the Senator is familiar with that.

Will the tunnel itself be two tracks or just one track?

It is a single bore tunnel that will house both tracks.

In the documents it is stated that it is expected it might be able to cope with 20,000 passengers per hour. Is that from the first day it opens or is that scaled up? How many carriages will be on an individual train?

Basically, the capability will be there from day one. If the demand is there from day one it will be able to deliver that. The station platforms are about 65 m in length. Again, depending what solution comes back from the competition, some manufacturers may go with three carriages per train and some may go with four. As the trains are coming back from a design, build, finance, operate and maintain contract there is a degree of flexibility as to the configuration of the number of carriages in a train.

I was told that Ireland's train and rail network has a separate and unique gauge to that available in other parts of the world, which is creating extra cost for us because everything has to be customised. Is the new MetroLink underground line going to use the Irish gauge or will it use the more common international gauge?

It will use the more common international gauge.

Okay. If I get on at Charlemont station how long would it take to get to the airport?

It will be in the order of 25 minutes.

One of the things I hear about public transport all the time is that we in Ireland do not currently have access to the ability to tap a card to pay and walk in. Will this be incorporated as part of the passenger experience?

Yes. It is being planned into the routes. Next generation ticketing is due to go live in Dublin in 2028 and obviously MetroLink is being built with that ability in it. That next generation ticketing will be operational when it opens.

My last question is about future-proofing. Obviously, 20,000 people is quite a lot of people. Is it envisaged that the two tracks will be sufficient for what we are looking for into the next 20 years?

It is scaled for that time horizon.

I thank the witnesses.

I thank Senator Byrne. I thank the witnesses for coming in today. I am quite conscious that Mr. Flynn is the interim programme director and I thank him for coming to answer all our questions. Has the National Transport Authority advertised for the new CEO role?

The sanction was received yesterday so the expectation is that this will kick off during the course of the next week.

Okay. The NTA will be advertising for the role. That is fine. I do not want to pre-empt anything but at the same time I was just curious myself. I am conscious of Mr. Flynn's position with that.

I will jump to the questions specifically. The Critical Infrastructure Bill came through here so that is something we would all be familiar with. Does the NTA believe or expect the MetroLink project will be designated under the Critical Infrastructure Act?

I expect that MetroLink, as the largest project in the State, would be listed in the Critical Infrastructure Act.

We put the infrastructure Bill through so, hopefully, we will be getting some crystallisation on that over the summer about where it might be designated, or indeed the first designation. That was just something I wanted to clarify.

I have no question or problem with the spending to date, but by the end of this year I believe it was €354 million towards the end of 2025 and then expenditure of €200 million between June to December 2026. To clarify, what will be the total expenditure by the end of the year? Do the witnesses have that number?

By the end of this year-----

There is a missing six months in the numbers.

Apologies. That will be €725 million.

Sorry, maybe it was alluded to elsewhere but it was just like a jigsaw puzzle and missing a piece. It will be €725 million. I am sitting here with three hats. I am on the Committee on Budgetary Oversight, which is obviously important from a strategic perspective. I am on the infrastructure committee, and this is exactly in the wheelhouse of being a key infrastructure project. I also have the good fortune of being on the Committee of Public Accounts and ultimately we get to ask the questions. Until it is developed, I would expect MetroLink is something that we should obviously review and continue to ask questions on. Where will the Metrolink costs sit from a Committee of Public Accounts perspective? Perhaps Ms Shaw would have a point of view on this rather then Mr. Flynn or Mr. Creegan. Do they have a view? The witnesses have been at the public accounts committee, so where will we be able to ask the questions? Ultimately, we want to ensure it gets built, and that is great and everyone is for it, but what about the oversight and the parliamentary oversight? Where do we believe the parliamentary oversight will sit for this project?

Our understanding is that the budget accountability will stick with the Department of Transport. The NTA will provide support and technical expertise as we go through the approvals processes and the monitoring and oversight of the project. It will also report on and support the MetroLink team as it develops. That is where it will sit. The Committee of Public Accounts will be able to review the budget information there.

To add to that, the new statutory body that is to be established was mentioned in our opening statements. Our understanding is that this body will come within the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which would then make it-----

That is good. That was my question. The witnesses believe the Comptroller and Auditor General will be overseeing the new statutory body. Obviously if it is under the Comptroller and Auditor General, it will end up on the Committee of Public Accounts.

That legislation clearly still has to go through, but that is our understanding of it.

That is interesting from an accountability and transparency perspective.

I want to touch on the design and outline of the network. This question might be for Mr. Creegan. I will wear my parochial hat in speaking about those who will use DART+ North West and DART+ South West. Reference has been made to Glasnevin. Will Glasnevin become a key junction as the DART+ routes come in and go up to the airport? Is that the plan? Typically in Dublin, we are used to everything being programmed to come into Pearse Street, Connolly Station and Heuston Station. Essentially, you have to come into the city centre for everything. Will there be a slightly different element to this?

As part of DART+ West, we are building a big station at Spencer Dock which will have the same importance as the stations the Deputy mentioned - Pearse, Connolly and so on. Glasnevin will become one of the most critical DART stations on the network because you will have two DART lines - one out to Kilcock and one down to Kildare - both going through that station and with MetroLink passing below them.

At Glasnevin.

At Glasnevin. It will make interchange for a variety of different places very easy, so it will become one of the key stations on the network. To follow through on what the Deputy asked, if you are coming in from Kilcock or some place like that, you will change off the DART, go down a level in the station to get the metro, and head on to the airport.

I thank Mr. Creegan for that.

I have a final question. I know these elements cost money, but we will have spent €750 million, which is a significant amount of money. When do the witnesses feel that the real turbo charge in investment will take place? We have heard from them about the need to do scoping and planning, and even to buy buildings as was announced today, but when do they feel the next huge level of expenditure will kick in?

We will be getting the main civil works contractors on the site in 2028. We will be doing quite a bit of work towards the back end of 2027, but the very heavy work will kick off in 2028 in terms of the really big spend. From 2028 forward, we will be seeing a significant ramp up in the expenditure.

Okay, thanks for that. I was going to try another question, but I will be good. I call Deputy Michael Murphy next, who is a guest. As he is the Chairman of the transport committee, no doubt he knows a lot about this.

I appreciate this opportunity. As the Chairman has said, this project intersects with multiple committees. I have read both opening statements. The taxpayer and I want to understand who is ultimately responsible for this project. Is it the NTA as the approving authority? Is TII responsible for the delivery of the project, or is it the Department or the new delivery body to be established? Who is ultimately responsible and accountable to the Oireachtas?

I will try to answer, but Mr. Creegan might come in as well on this.

We have to wait for the creation of the new delivery body to come through. Ultimately, that new body will be responsible for the delivery within the agreed scope and budget, once the formal governmental approval is signed off in the next few weeks, as Mr. Flynn mentioned. The ultimate accountability for making sure the project is driven forward will sit with the Department of Transport. The NTA will provide the technical expertise as the assurance and technical body to ensure the project moves along in the right way within the agreed budget and schedule. Does that answer the Deputy's question?

Based on what Ms Shaw has said to me, it will be a shared responsibility model. In my experience, when there is shared responsibility, ultimately nobody is responsible.

Ultimately the Department of Transport will be accountable for the project. The delivery body will deliver it and the NTA will provide the assurance.

I would like to ask about the new delivery body, the new CEO and the new proposed board. The biggest fear we all have is that this project will go significantly over budget or have significant delays. I am trying to understand who is responsible. Is it the board, the CEO, the NTA or TII? Ms Shaw has said it is ultimately the Department that is responsible.

As the creation of the delivery body is going through, and based on the conversations happening, that is where it will ultimately sit. There is still a bit of work to be done to finalise all of that detail, but certainly the question the Deputy is asking needs to be totally clarified. We will go away and undertake to give that answer to him.

As I said, in my experience, shared responsibility is no responsibility.

Mr. Flynn talked about momentum being absolutely key to controlling cost. Where does he see the biggest risks to this project in terms of cost and time delay? I would also like to ask about the revised business case, which the Cabinet has yet to consider. Are there any particular risks highlighted in that review of the business case?

Momentum is key. If you lose momentum, there is a risk the supply chain will get switched off. Maintaining that momentum and keeping it up going forward will keep the supply chain engaged. Ultimately, time is money. Keeping the momentum is essential. We have got a plan in place that keeps that going in the right direction.

I just want to focus on the risks.

Apologies. In terms of risks-----

Apart from inflation.

-----it is about making sure the supply chain is fully engaged and ensuring we have an efficient and agile decision-making process. Once we have contractors on the pitch, we need to be able to go at pace in terms of making sure there are no delays introduced as regards that decision-making process. As the Deputy outlined, inflation is key, as well as those global events. Ultimately, as somebody mentioned earlier, trying to predict what is going to happen in the next ten years is a challenge. Keeping an eye on those factors would be essential to keeping the costs in sight.

My final question relates to the balance between procurement confidentiality and public accountability. First, on procurement, what lessons have been learned from other particular projects? I do not need to name those projects that have significantly gone over cost in this procurement process. At what stage will the taxpayer be aware of the value of these individual contracts?

We follow the infrastructure guidelines, where there is a three-step process. Currently, we are going through the approval gate 2 process and the detail there. The next approval gate is approval gate 3. At that point, the visibility of those big contracts will be there, and that is the point at which there is the opportunity to make decisions on following through on those contracts.

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the witnesses here today. I represent the people in Swords and Fingal East, and I actually live in Swords.

I bought my home 35 years ago on the promise of the delivery of metro north, and I am still waiting. However, I welcome the fact there is some movement. I listened to the Minister, Deputy Chambers, with some horror, when he said that he could not give a deadline date and that it was at least another ten years, if not more. When it came to budgets, he said he did not know until he had a conversation with the witnesses. I do not know how anyone can do a project without setting an amount that it costs at the outset. I have raised with the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, on a number of occasions my concerns that this will be a children's hospital mark 2 but I hope I am wrong.

To get back to the more local issues, I attended each one of the TII meetings with stakeholders as they went along, as did Fingallians, our local GAA club. Major infrastructure projects should contribute to communities, not wipe them out. At the moment, there is a situation where the biggest club in Fingal, Fingal north in particular, is going to be without its pitches for three years, which may stretch into a longer period. We do not really know. There is a proposal that there be a two-pronged approach - first, that one of its pitches remain in use for the duration and, second, that a pitch or pitches be sourced north of the business park for it as a temporary measure until it returns to its home. Fingallians is not just a sports club; it is a community centre. Everybody meets there. It is a big loss to kids, to adults and to the community that uses the centre. Would the witnesses support this two-pronged approach where they can hold onto one of the pitches while the works are happening and sourcing another one? If so, what are they going to do about it?

The discussions on Friday will look at that. There has been quite a bit of work trying to rejig what has to be done on the site to maintain that pitch. The intention is to maintain that community spirit and activity. We will continue to engage with Fingallians to try to find the best solution.

It is very concerned and feels it has been let down. It has participated in all of the discussions, in fairness to it.

There are about five large developments that have planning permission along the R132. The chances are they could start developing over the coming weeks or months. At the moment, Mr. Flynn will be aware of the traffic chaos in Swords and along the R132. Is there some plan in place if the developments start along with the work currently being done for the metro on the R132? We are living in traffic chaos at the moment. Some of it should be managed by Fingal County Council but it has not been. People are reporting an hour and a half to get from Balbriggan to the centre of Swords. We do not have a decent transport system, which is why we need the metro so badly. Our buses do not turn up. We do not have it. Approximately 70% of the people in Fingal commute outside of Fingal to go to work. The vast majority of them are going in their cars because they do not have the option. If these works start on top of that, it is going to add to the chaos, and that is what it is. Is there any plan in place to deal with the potential of those additional developments coming on board? They could start in weeks.

We have a dialogue ongoing with Fingal County Council. We have done quite a bit of work around traffic modelling. We are overlaying what we think we will be requiring in terms of our truck movements and the like as part of the plan. The trucks that we will be allowing onto the job will have trackers and things like that so that we can monitor where they are going so that they will need to stick to the approved routes and so on. There are quite a lot of plans in place to make sure we have an understanding of what those are. We will be looking at how we can arrange the traffic from our side so that it does not conflict with peak hour traffic and we are not adding to the peak traffic congestion. We will continue to look at how we can optimise that and not introduce an additional burden.

All times are peak times in Swords at the moment. There is not a downtime. I appreciate Mr. Flynn's answers.

An important point was made about the fallen momentum. It is a difficulty in that it actually creates costs in the long run. While some of the questioning has been challenging to the witnesses, that loss in momentum lies in the political sphere, in many ways, over the past 20 years, and not with the witnesses. It is worrisome when that I hear that there is nearly a crystallisation of the route of accountability at the moment. I hope that this is fixed soon. I would like to get the witnesses views on how they experienced the planning process so far. It was mentioned that the planning process was slowed by two years. That is probably one of the most important aspects of this committee - to try to work out the technical elements of the State's engagement with projects that either slow it down or increase costs. I am not looking at the witnesses to apportion blame necessarily but what would they like to see changed within the system that would mean that they could deliver what they needed to deliver in a speedier fashion?

I thank the Deputy for the question. I was reading the report that this committee put out in June and the 12 items identified. Broadly, a lot of it resonates with the sorts of initiatives where we need to maintain that momentum. That is the type of forward-thinking that we need to take this forward, specifically the early engagement with stakeholders, regulatory efficiency and development and local authority co-operation. There will be a massive demand on the local authorities from MetroLink because a lot of consents and approvals will be required from county councils and so on. This will be an increased workload for them over and above what they are used to doing. Those will be areas where they will need support in. The committee also identified legal system reform and streamlining of the planning system. Those are all things that resonate with us and our experience. Looking forward in terms of making sure we can maintain that momentum is that multi-annual funding, which was one of the recommendations from the report. We would certainly be looking to support those in particular.

To date in Ireland, we have linear or sequential development. It seems that everybody has to wait until every step is finished before they start their process. It seems that in a process such as this, however, what one wants is concurrent planning and development so that all the different State agencies that are dealing with this are dealing with them at the same time. Is that in place at the moment?

In terms of the planning process, I have not been intimately involved in that prior to my arrival-----

Even for permits, licensing, tendering, procurement and all those aspects.

There are certain things that must be done in a particular logical sequence. One needs to understand what it is that one has to go and buy so one has to specify that and must then go and buy it

There are certain elements that one has to do in parallel. Broadly, when it comes to the construction phase, trying to get the permits and so on in parallel with that will, again, be essential to maintain momentum.

I know I previously referenced procurement and we had good engagement on it. Can Mr. Flynn give me more detail about how many people it will take at the peak of this construction project to develop this project?

We estimate that somewhere in the region of 7,000 to 8,000 people will be on site at the peak of the construction.

Does Mr. Flynn see that coming from the current construction market labour force? How are we going to fill this?

We will look at a range of options to deal with that. There will be a lot of specialist capability that does not exist in Ireland so there will be a need to bring some capability in from Europe. There is also the opportunity to use existing skills that are available in Ireland. MetroLink and the NTA are working together to develop a workforce capacity plan and engage with the Construction Industry Federation, CIF, to look at working with it and its members to raise their awareness of what is coming down the track so we are able to support the CIF and its members with their plans to bring on people so that they are ready to support projects like MetroLink and other projects the NTA has in the pipeline.

We are looking at what that workforce requirement is, the capabilities in Ireland and what we need to import from other places. Given the length of this programme alongside other projects in the pipeline, there is an opportunity for us to see how we can use things like our procurement techniques to encourage the growth of careers for people in Ireland. It involves attracting them at school age and at college and university age into potential careers through apprenticeships, graduate programmes, etc., as part of those procurements so even though we might be bringing in expertise from abroad, it is about how we can encourage those experts to create those career pathways for people who are-----

Some 7,000 to 8,000 is a significant number. Has MetroLink any early estimations of the percentage that will come from the existing construction labour force in Ireland versus what we will require from overseas?

We do not have a definitive number.

What is the ball park figure?

I would need to check the specifics of the reports we have. If it is okay, I can come back to the Deputy.

Is MetroLink confident that it can import the skills it requires?

One of our requirements during the procurement process is our contractors proving they are capable of providing the resources necessary to deliver the job.

A figure of 7,000 or 8,000 was mentioned. How many of them would be direct employees of MetroLink at the peak of construction? I know the way it does its business will evolve over time.

With the establishment of the statutory delivery-----

How many are there currently?

Currently, we have in the order of 450 full-time equivalent staff working on the job. That is a mix of people we have through arrangements, some of whom are TII permanent staff members. We also use what we call the client partner arrangement. This is where we procure resource augmentation from a range of international companies to provide us with capability to bring in the necessary-----

How many MetroLink employees are there in terms of construction?

In terms of TII, the number is in the order of 55.

They are specific. That would go towards the amount of money MetroLink has spent to date. Mr. Flynn mentioned a figure of €715 million earlier. Does that cover just the money within MetroLink or does it also the TII expenditure?

It would cover the TII staff engaged in MetroLink in addition to those other resources.

So those €715 million spend is being captured in TII's salaries so it is not a separate spend. That is important to note when people talk about numbers because that is being captured. It is not a new spend. What would be the key expenditures from a location perspective? Has MetroLink identified all the sites that it feels will be required? Have all those stages been gone through?

We have identified all the sites we need and are progressively working through those to secure them. Not all of them are secured. This will be a rolling-----

It is a negotiation.

This will be a rolling programme.

Who are the key stakeholders MetroLink is working alongside? Do they include Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council?

They include Dublin City Council, Fingal County Council and Dublin Fire Brigade. Building control is a key player in that as well while the Commission for Railway Regulation is another. These are among some of the key stakeholders with which we need to work. They have a major say in what the solution looks like so we need to make sure we get input from them to inform what goes into the contracts because, ultimately, they have a role in the longer term.

That brings the meeting to a close. I thank the witnesses for assisting the committee today in this important matter. I ask that any information requested by members that was not available today be provided to the committee as soon as possible. If there are any issues with the supply of this information, I ask that the clerk be informed as soon as possible.