Good morning. Apologies have been received from Senator Imelda Goldsboro. Ironically, I have received several messages that a number of members are running late because of a delayed train.

The purpose of today's meeting is to discuss the recently announced changes by the National Transport Authority, NTA, in the national fare structure for public service obligation, PSO, services. I welcome Mr. Hugh Creegan, deputy chief executive of the NTA, and Mr. Jeremy Ryan, director of public transport services. The purpose of today's meeting is relatively straightforward, in that the NTA has made a decision that will affect public transport passengers across the country, and it is appropriate that we understand the rationale for that decision. I recognise that there are significant pressures associated with maintaining and expanding our public transport network. We all want to see more services. We want to see greater capacity and connectivity, particularly in parts of the country where public transport provision still urgently needs significant improvement.

Equally, affordability matters. At a time when Government policy is encouraging more people to choose public transport, passengers are entitled to understand why fares are increasing, what alternatives were considered and how the impact on regular commuters was assessed. We will approach today's discussion with an open mind. It is not about suggesting that public transport can be expanded without being paid for. It is about understanding whether the balance being struck between passenger fares and Exchequer support is the right one. I really look forward to the NTA's evidence today.

On the format of the meeting, we will hear the opening statement, followed by a questions and answers session with the members of the committee. I ask members to be concise in their questions to allow witnesses the opportunity to participate.

I will read the usual note on privilege. I remind our witnesses 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 that 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.

For the members, I remind them of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect 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 will allow members seven minutes for questions and answers. Thereafter, I will let in other members for a shorter period, to be agreed with the membership.

I now invite Mr. Creegan to make his opening statement on behalf of the NTA.

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it to discuss the fares determination published by the NTA on 3 September. Before I begin, I apologise on behalf of Ms Anne Shaw, chief executive officer of the NTA, who is on planned leave and is unable to attend today.

At the outset, it may be helpful if I explain the context of the NTA’s decision in relation to fares. The NTA is a statutory State body operating under the aegis of the Department of Transport. Under the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008, the NTA is responsible for determining and reviewing fares across contracted public transport services operating under the Transport for Ireland, TFI, network. The revenue from those passenger fares, augmented by the PSO funding provided by the Exchequer, pays for the operation of the TFI buses, trains and trams.

The committee will be aware that there has been no national fares increase since 2018. During that period, Governments have introduced a range of initiatives related to transport services, including a 20% fare reduction in 2022, a 50% discount for young adults and students, free travel for children under nine years of age and enhancements to the free travel schemes. These measures have delivered real benefits for passengers and continue to do so. At the same time, passenger demand has reached record levels, with more than 363 million journeys made on PSO-supported services in 2025. This reflects the success of sustained investment in public transport and the growing number of people choosing sustainable travel options. However, fare revenue has not kept pace with the cost of operating and expanding services. Despite increased passenger numbers, fare revenue fell from €667 million in 2019 to €576 million in 2025, while operating costs increased from €971 million to €1.379 billion over the same period. As a result, fare revenue's contribution to operating costs has declined significantly.

Budget 2026 set out an objective to develop a sustainable funding model for PSO transport services, including assessing all aspects that comprised the performance of the PSO programme, including the role played by fare revenue towards overall operating costs of the PSO network. Linked to that objective, a PSO oversight group was established by the Department of Transport, comprising officials from that Department and officials from the Department of public expenditure and reform as visiting members. NewERA sits on that group in an advisory capacity to the Department, with the NTA acting as the principal agency consulted by the group. The aim of the group is to support the Minister for Transport and his Department in oversight, strengthening governance, and enhancing the viability of the funding model for the public transport PSO programme.

Funding pressures have intensified in recent years and the programme faces rising cost pressures, resulting in a structural imbalance between income and expenditure and a growing disparity between operating costs and revenues. The PSO oversight group has considered the issue of sustained PSO investment and fare revenue contribution. There is a common understanding that continued investment in, and expansion of, PSO transport services require both additional Exchequer funding and a rebalanced contribution from fare revenue. It is worth noting that, in 2016, fare revenue contributed 69% of the operating cost of the State-provided public transport network. By last year, that contribution had dropped to 38%, which was significantly below the European average. The new fares determination is intended to address that imbalance and, alongside continued investment from the Government, will enable the continued roll-out of new services and enhancements to existing services.

Looking ahead, the NTA has identified approximately 140 new service initiatives and capacity enhancements as part of its 2027 budget submission to the Department of Transport. This would represent the biggest in-year and year-on-year enhancement of services in many years. Subject to funding discussions that are currently ongoing, these proposals are intended to enhance existing services, meet growing demand, improve connectivity and support the continued shift towards sustainable transport.

The fares determination marks another step in the implementation of the NTA's national fares strategy, adopted in 2023. That strategy aims to simplify fares, improve consistency across the country and make the fare system easier for passengers to understand. It will also support the continued roll-out of initiatives such as TFI 90, enabling passengers to transfer between services within a defined period without incurring additional fares, thereby reducing costs for many users of the network.

We fully recognise that fare levels matter to passengers and we do not take this decision lightly. In making this determination, we have sought to strike a careful balance between affordability for passengers and the sustainable funding needed to maintain, improve and expand public transport services. Maintaining that balance will remain a guiding principle in future annual fares reviews. Our objective to encourage more people to use public transport by providing a network that is reliable, accessible, affordable and capable of meeting Ireland's future transport needs remains unchanged.

I will be pleased to answer questions from committee members.

I thank Mr. Creegan for his opening statement and I invite questions from members in accordance with our rota.

I welcome the witnesses from the NTA and I will get straight into it. Obviously, the change in fares will have an effect on everyday living for people using public transport. The idea of the model is that we should be encouraging people to use public transport, and maybe instead of increasing fares, this is something the Government should have looked into more deeply. Mr. Creegan said 69% was covered by fares a number of years ago and was 38% now. If we want to encourage people to use public transport, the only way we can do it is to keep fares at a low rate. People are paying quite a lot as it is. A trip up here costs quite lot of money. I use the train on and off.

Significant savings can be made by the NTA and this is where the money should have been found. I could spend the day here providing information from around the country. A west Cork operator, Damien Long of West Cork Connect, is an incredible deliverer of a public transport service. Sometimes, I feel as if the NTA is trying to make sure that it is putting him out of business instead of encouraging him. He offered to take over the entire Kinsale route recently but he was refused by the NTA. It was an astonishing decision made by the NTA. It is wiping millions of euro from its budget that could have been taken in by a private operator who can deliver. This is not somebody who only set up the year before but somebody who has delivered for many years and continues to deliver. Why does the NTA make decisions like this, knowing well it could save millions, might end up saving the State, and might end up with a situation where people would not have to look at fare increases, which are putting people in very difficult situations, especially in a cost-of-living crisis?

I know the NTA is in trouble financially because it promised to deliver Local Link routes that it cannot deliver. These promises have been going on for 12 months. They are a nice hidden secret, albeit not by the NTA, as it can only deliver with the money it is given. Areas such as Clonakilty, Grange and Timoleague were promised a route 12 months or a year and a half ago. It was put out to tender but nothing has happened because there is no money. It is the same story with the route from Kealkill in west Cork to Macroom or Bantry. Tenders are being put out but it is obvious the budget is no longer there. Where there are savings to be made, the NTA is not working with local independent operators, and this is where a mistake is being made.

We have situations where independent operators are driving a bus and the NTA is driving a bus and it is a waste of money. Instead of concentrating its efforts in places and areas where it promised to deliver but was not able to, it is continuing to deliver in areas where - I mean no disrespect - doing so is not needed because someone else can run it. Will the witnesses admit here today that there is wastage in its organisation? How will this be turned around? If I can point to one area where millions of euro can be saved, there must be millions and millions throughout the country in the same situation that can be saved. Perhaps the witnesses can explain this to me because I certainly cannot figure it out.

I will start by responding on the services that were not introduced, as Deputy Collins has mentioned a number of them. The reality is that, while there was an increase in funding to the NTA this year, it was sufficient to support the existing network and we were not in a position to introduce new services. Part of the purpose of the fares determination is that, if it is augmented with additional Exchequer funding, we will be in a position to roll out additional services. As Deputy Collins heard in the opening statement, 140 initiatives are planned if we can get enough of funding for them.

In the example Deputy Collins mentioned, a commercial operator wanted to do something and we had not granted him a licence. These decisions are taken very carefully by us. We have no desire to refuse something that is a workable proposition but sometimes these things have effects that people might not see at first blush. Part of the route might then have to be served by another service to be provided or something like this. I do not know the ins and outs of the particular example given by Deputy Collins but there are factors that sometimes mean we cannot agree to provide a licence for a service. We support a commercial network wherever we can. It is where we have conflicts with other operators, including PSO services, where we may have to take a different view.

In the particular example Deputy Collins mentioned, there is a PSO service operating on the same corridor. It is a Bus Éireann service, as Deputy Collins knows. What we want to do is to be able to guarantee fares, service levels and stopping patterns. To do this, we need a contract and we cannot award a contract to a commercial operator without tendering. If we were to look at this corridor, we would have to tender the service, and the operator would have an opportunity to tender for the route, but it would require a full corridor contract rather than just a contract for what is a PSO to ensure we have the required service pattern, frequency and fare level across all services on the corridor.

I thank the witnesses. As I have said, this is one area where I can see significant savings that could be made to the NTA's budget. If this is happening in just one area, what is happening geographically throughout the country that could save us the cost we are adding to the mother and father trying to board the bus in the morning? We want to encourage them to continue to use the service but now we are going to move them back into cars because it is too expensive to get a return ticket. I am just saying this is a very simplistic way of seeing where significant savings can be made.

I have been on the board of Local Link as a volunteer for many years. More and more, the NTA has eroded it. I have never taken a brown cent from being on that board and I do not want it either because it is a great way to deliver a service locally. We have no voice any more. My fellow people might not be happy with me saying this but it is a fact. We have been squeezed out. We are on the ground living locally. The witnesses are experts in their own right and I will not take that away from them but we can see where significant savings can be made through Local Link and still increase the service but no one is listening. At the time when we had control over the bus services, we ran them efficiently. The NTA took control of the services and blew money left, right and centre without listening to the local boards and the local knowledge on how it ran. That is where the money should be saved and not through adding to customers' fares.

It will come as no surprise to the NTA that I was not impressed with this fare determination or the lack of transparency and communication from the NTA with public representatives and with the commuters affected. By January 2027, commuters in Balbriggan and Skerries will, in fact, be paying a 50% increase on the fares they were paying in January 2025 and this is simply unacceptable. Obviously, we are going to get new carriages in, we hope, quarter 2 of 2027 and I very much welcome this but in the same week that Irish Rail announced a new timetable for 2027, with not a single new service on the northern commuter line, the NTA came out with a fare determination that meant my commuters were going to be paying 50% more than they did less than two years ago. This is simply not good enough.

I want to get onto my questions. How much additional revenue will this generate? I just want the figure.

If the fare changes are introduced in January, we expect €70 million additional revenue in 2027 on existing services.

Passenger numbers are at a record high but revenue has decreased since 2019. What is the key service that is not producing the fare income that it was?

It is across the board, because in that-----

Commuters in my area are paying more.

It is across the State. Fares have decreased for everyone since 2018, and by 20% since 2022. A young adult discount of 50% was introduced for those aged up to 25. Free child fares were introduced for those aged under nine.

I am being parochial. I want to get back to commuters in my area. Does Mr. Ryan consider it fair that people commuting from Balbriggan and Skerries will be paying 50% more in less than two years and paying twice what their neighbours in Rush and Lusk are paying? This fare determination was actually a way to rebalance that inequality and unfairness, but it was not used to do that.

The Deputy has added two things together. As she is aware, we did a fare restructuring across Dublin last year that was intended to be revenue neutral and sort out a legacy system of fare structures that was not equitable or fair. I know the Deputy does not fully agree with that. That exercise concluded in the middle of last year. This is a different determination for the purposes of raising fares to create revenue to invest in public transport services.

I appreciate that, but they are both fare determinations. What analysis was done of the fare determination in 2025? What evidence has the NTA used to tell commuters in Balbriggan and Skerries that they should be paying 50% more less than two years from now? I assume that the NTA did look at the evidence and made sure that the fares being increased were fair right across the country.

We did that as part of last year's fare determination. We made the decision to put in the structure we did based on our belief that it was an equitable and fair structure.

The NTA responded to one of my parliamentary questions earlier this year by saying it was going to do an analysis of the impact of the fare determination in 2025. Has that been undertaken?

We have collected the data and looked at it, but we have not produced a report on it. We have two reports that we publish. One is a rail census review, which is in preparation.

It is late.

The second is the national household survey that we do across about 5,000 households and that picks up trends. I was referring to both of those in that answer to the parliamentary question.

My constituents and I find it extremely difficult to understand how the board of the NTA can agree a new fare determination without concluding the analysis of the previous fare determination of 2025. That does not tell me that the NTA is working on an evidence- or transparency-led basis. That is simply unacceptable.

I do not think that is the full and correct picture.

The NTA has not concluded the analysis of the fare determination in 2025, yet it has come out with a new one whereby it will ask commuters in my area to pay 50% more less than two years from now. That is simply not acceptable.

We did a fare determination that affected some people negatively and others positively. That was revenue neutral. We did a separate fare increase this year with one and only one objective, namely to correct the imbalance that occurred between fare revenue and Exchequer funding. The Deputy saw the determination. There are 50 pages of data to back it up.

I did, and I encourage the NTA to use plain English when it is drafting its fare determinations in order that people can understand what is in them. That is a matter for another day, however.

In terms of the NTA's communication - or lack of it - and lack of transparency, is this what we are to expect going forward? It is being signalled that there may be annual fare increases. Is the NTA going to continue with this lack of communication with public representatives and the transport committee and its lack of consultation with the commuters and communities affected? Is that how the NTA is going to continue to operate?

We provided briefing material to public representatives when we made the announcement, so-----

It was on the day of the announcement. I read about it in the newspaper.

That is correct, but that is the process we go through for fare determinations. It has been the case for many years.

So there will be no consultation, no transparency-----

Transparency is part-----

-----and no indication.

It was budget 2026 that required us to look at the imbalance between the fare revenue and Exchequer funding during this year, so the signal-----

So this is what we can expect from the NTA. These fare determinations are just going to drop on us annually.

We do not do these things lightly. A lot of consideration goes into this process. There are likely to be further increases in the years ahead. That is a natural thing. We have had a period of eight years where there have not been any fare increases.

Except that is not true in my area, so I am not going to accept it. We still have a few months before the introduction of this fare determination. Will the NTA commit to look again at the fares for people in commuter zone 2, which includes Skerries and Balbriggan, and at addressing the unfairness and imbalance in the fares?

We have made our determination. We are now in the process of doing the work to implement it. I can say openly that we do not envisage doing a review of the type that the Deputy has suggested.

I find it extraordinary that the NTA has not finalised its analysis of the fare determination in 2025 and has not addressed the unfairness and inequality in the regard to these issues. The NTA did not consult with us and has not been transparent with us. It did not even tell us this was coming, and yet here we are having this dropped upon us. We are just supposed to put up with it and our commuters are just supposed to put up with it. I simply find that unacceptable.

I have some questions. We have seen fare revenue fall between 2019 and 2025 from €667 million to €576 million. To some extent, I accept what Mr. Creegan said in respect of the 20% fare reduction during the intervening period, the 50% young adult and student discount, free travel for children under the age of nine and enhancements to the free travel scheme. In the same period, we have seen operating costs increase from €971 million to almost €1.4 billion. What were the main factors contributing to that significant increase in operating costs during that period?

It is a combination of background inflation and growth in service provision. We have done some analysis of this to see what the cost is per kilometre travelled and per passenger. Taking account of inflation, the figures are, broadly speaking, in line with those from 2018 and 2019. In some cases, they are lower. In terms of efficiencies, we think that we are not seeing a more inefficient network. As more services are provided, that costs more money. There has also been significant inflation of over 20% in the intervening period as well.

Could the NTA perhaps send a document to the committee detailing where that increase in operating costs came from?

Okay.

In 2016, fare revenue represented 69% of operating costs. That has fallen to 38%. The opening statement indicates that this was at the lower end of the European average. Could we get a few examples of comparisons with other European member states in terms of that figure of 38%?

We have looked at surveys of fare levels across Europe carried out by the International Association of Public Transport, which is a public transport organisation. The fare recovery is about 44%, so we are below that.

Am I right in saying it is two-thirds in the UK?

The UK is one of the parts of Europe with higher fares, generally speaking.

I want to focus now on the 140 new service initiatives and capacity enhancements included as part of the NTA's 2027 budget submission. Is information on those 140 initiatives publicly available?

It is not available at this stage because it is part of the budget process. At the end of that process, we will be in a position to make it available.

Being parochial, like some of the other members, are some of those new service initiatives related to County Tipperary?

We do want to complete the Connecting Ireland programme. Anything outstanding in the programme around the country would be something we hope to implement, subject to funding.

Is the €70 million critical in terms of rolling out those 140 initiatives?

There are a couple of things next year. The cost of these initiatives is one thing. There is also an uplift in the cost of operating the network, just to do with inflation, fuel costs and all of these things. As a result, that €70 million is critical to contributing towards the additional operating cost and the new services.

The short answer is "Yes".

If I can be very parochial, there is a review of the town bus in Clonmel at the moment. It is crucial for the ambition and the vision we have for our town. I know the 326 service from Tipperary town to Thurles is also being looked at. A key ambition of mine is the spine route between Clonmel and Nenagh. Is this fare increase crucial in delivering those types of services?

If we drifted into speaking directly on one, we would have to speak on the other 139. The Connecting Ireland network comprises services including those types of service. In completing the Connecting Ireland network to which Mr. Ryan referred, that would include services of that type.

On the bigger picture, what was the biggest factor in determining this fare increase?

The biggest factor was the need to invest. We are completing 2026 and have not been able to invest in new services even though we and all the Deputies and Senators know there is a demand for new services everywhere. The biggest factor was the need to be able to invest in and develop that network further next year and in the following years.

Were any alternatives to fare increases considered by the NTA?

There are only two sources of income to run the services. One is fare revenue and the other is Exchequer funding. In making a determination, we anticipate both additional fare revenue and additional Exchequer funding which will allow us to make that investment next year.

Was there any assessment of whether increasing fares could suppress passenger growth?

There is likely to be some impact on passenger numbers. We estimate that for every 10% fare increase, one might expect to see around a 3% decrease in passenger numbers. However quite a lot of our services are under pressure capacity-wise at the moment so we are optimistic that we will not see a significant decline regardless of fare increase in 2027.

I welcome Mr. Creegan and Mr. Ryan and thank them for being here this morning. The announcement of fare increases created a lot of disappointment among commuters and us. In a previous committee meeting during the summer, I asked Anne Shaw about a particular route in Mayo. We had a very positive and constructive engagement with the NTA logistics team in Buswells earlier this year. It proposed a new route which would connect all of County Mayo to Knock Airport. I raised it, as the witnesses may recall, in the most recent meeting here. While fare increases are naturally not going to be received positively, the NTA mentioned there would be up to 140 new routes which have been submitted to the Department for funding. Is this route part of that?

I cannot go into the specifics of what is in that ask but we have asked for funding to complete the Connecting Ireland programme.

Is that route in the Connecting Ireland programme?

I do not have the full list of asks in front of me. I will come back to the Senator on that.

I raised it at the previous committee meeting and now. If one was to make a prediction it would be clear what I am talking about. Not to have that knowledge is disappointing. I understand if Mr. Ryan wants to defend certain things but can he not find out if that is in the ask? The ask has been made. It was proposed to me by the NTA after positive engagement with the team to roll out new routes. Then we can justify it and say, "Here is what you are getting for a fare increase," but the NTA is not demonstrating that.

That is because it is part of the budgetary process. Discussions are going on between the Department of Transport, the Minister and the Department of public expenditure over funding for this year which ties into the list of 140 services. While that process is ongoing, we do not feel in a position to release the details. Immediately, when it is over, we can clarify for the Senator where things stand. We know the services needed across the country. As part of our ask, through the Department we are looking for the funding provision linked to this fare increase that allows us to deliver against that list.

So we are none the wiser on what connectivity improvements will be made for Mayo. The one thing I asked for in the previous meeting was for the NTA to ask the Minister and the Department to fund it. I got no real straight answer. I did not ask for fares to be increased. It is not for me to decide but then out of the blue comes the fare increase without any justification or proposals for commuters around the country, including Mayo.

We have not been in a position to do new services of that type this year. I think I said earlier that while we got a substantial increase in funding, it is sufficient to run the existing network or services but not sufficient to allow us to do new services. For 2026, we have not been in a position to do that service. We do not want to be in that place next year. We want to have the funding to be able to invest in the services the Senator and others recognise we need. Until we get through the budgetary process, we cannot give out a service plan saying we will do this and that service. We are just not in a position to do it. I hope, after the budget, whenever we are notified of our allocation, we will then be in a position to clarify it for the Senator.

Is it not a fair question to ask that, of the services put forward, the one I am asking for be included?

The trouble with answering that one question is we then have to explain what the 139 other ones are, potentially, if people ask the right question.

That is okay as well because people can advocate for their proposals. This is the Joint Committee on Transport. It is valid to ask a specific question on a specific route so we can say to the people contacting us about fare increases that this will unlock connectivity across Mayo but, for all I know, there is nothing for Mayo in this.

It is because we are caught in that budgetary process. We will be out of it, I presume, in a number of weeks. As Mr. Ryan said, we are looking to complete the remainder of Connecting Ireland. I am not totally familiar with the route in question but I suspect it is in the Connecting Ireland programme. If so, that is part of the process we are in.

All Connecting Ireland programme routes will be realised as part of this fare increase.

Not realised. It is important to say we have asked the Department of Transport, through the budgetary process, to provide the supporting funding alongside the fare increases that will get us to the position to deliver those 140 services.

That is 140 of the services in the Connecting Ireland programme but that is not all of the-----

To clarify, the 140 services cover BusConnects in Dublin and Cork and Connecting Ireland routes but the remainder of the Connecting Ireland programme is in our ask.

Will Mr. Ryan repeat the last bit of what he said?

The remainder of the Connecting Ireland programme is in our ask.

The full Connecting Ireland programme is in the ask.

It is in our ask.

Is 140 the full ask?

It is the full ask including Connecting Ireland, BusConnects Dublin, BusConnects Cork and a Letterkenny town service.

Mr. Ryan specified Letterkenny. Is there anything in Mayo?

As I said, I do not have the full list in front of me. If it is in the Connecting Ireland programme and it is an outstanding service, it is in the ask.

Why did Mr. Ryan mention Letterkenny and not anything in Mayo? Is it that he just does not have the information? Could we have it by the time I come in again?

If the budget allocation has been decided when we are in front of the committee again, of course we will share that.

Will Mr. Ryan say that again?

We categorise our services in four categories. One is the Bus Connects category, two is the Connecting Ireland category, three is town services and four is Local Link, if there are other services in that regard. The reference to Letterkenny is in the third category, town services.

There are town services proposed for Ballina and Castlebar in Mayo, which would be really welcome and is something I wanted to get to but obviously we have run out of time because I am trying to focus on the Knock Airport, which is a top-line priority.

I think it is really important we publish the 140 initiatives. I do not see how this undermines the budgetary process.

It will help.

If anything, I think we can be the NTA's allies as parliamentarians here on that. Maybe the NTA could link in with the Department after this meeting, but I do not see any reason why publishing the lists would undermine the budgetary process.

We will take it that, if the committee is happy, I will discuss it with the Department. If it is okay with that-----

Sorry, my formal ask is that the NTA discuss it with the Department. Again, as Chair, I do not see how this undermines the budgetary process. If anything, it could help the budgetary process. The witnesses can come back to us, maybe within 24 hours or before the end of the week, on those discussions with the Department.

The witnesses are very welcome and I thank them for their opening statement. I have a few questions arising out of some of what was said.

I think the NTA will accept that in the past ten years since 2016, there has been a 55% increase in passenger numbers across public services. Would the organisation accept that?

Sorry, between which period?

Since 2016, there has been a 55% increase in passenger numbers.

I can tell the Deputy that since 2019, the increase has been 23%. I do not have the figure to hand from 2016.

Mr. Ryan is not disputing what I am saying.

I am not disputing it, no.

I think that up to 2016, let us say between 2009 and 2016, there was a series of increases in those years on various different levels. The NTA would accept that as well.

Yes.

Some of them were 5% or 7% year on year. The NTA would accept that there were increases up to that point.

The NTA made a couple of, I will not say allegations, but statements that it is significantly below the European average of 38% of the fare contribution to operating costs. The witnesses said the average was 44%, so they are saying that 6% is significant, is it?

That is 6% on top of 38%, so that is around 15% to 20% lower than the European average.

There is 6% in Europe, and we are at 38%. The NTA is kind of spinning it when they say that is significant.

No, the difference is around 15% to 20%.

You said there was insufficient money to invest in all these new services and we saw that in 2026, practically no new services were provided. There was a clear choice for the NTA and for Government in any negotiations and discussions they had, and I think it had three or four meetings with the Minister over the past year. Is that right?

That is correct.

Was the insufficient funding, as Mr. Creegan said himself, discussed at any of those meetings? When we asked for the minutes, some of the meetings were not minuted and certainly some were the ones dealing with the IT system and the waste of money on that.

Were the insufficient funding and the need for increased funding for the NTA discussed in those meetings?

The need for additional PSO funding was discussed in those meetings.

There were no promises given. The NTA mentioned that a number of determinations had to be taken into account before coming to this decision. When did the decision come or when was it taken for the 15% increase? I will put it in context. We asked the parliamentary question on 27 April on whether there was going to be any increase in fares. The answer we received from Richard Kelly was that there was no immediate plan to increase fares. That was on 27 April.

When was the determination made and was that following a meeting that was minuted or not minuted with the Minister?

The determination was made at the start of September. It was announced on 3 September, so it was finalised at the end of August and start of September.

When did the NTA decide, in effect, that there would have to be increases due to insufficient Government funding?

It was decided around the end of August, just before the announcement.

Between the end of April and beginning of May, there was no inkling, in May or June.

Discussions had been going on for several months. A group had been set up, which I referred to in my opening statement, namely, the PSO oversight group. There had been discussions there and ultimately, there was a common understanding that we needed to rebalance.

Would Mr. Creegan accept that in some countries like Luxembourg and Hungary, for example, it is far less than 38%? I think it is 7% or 8% in Luxembourg, and 14% in Hungary. There are a lot of European countries in which the governments significantly invest money so that it is not insufficient and they do not have to come to the realisation, as the NTA obviously has, that the Government is not going to pony up so it will have to put the money back on the commuters. Is that not it?

There are different policy choices taken in different places.

So it was not the Government's priority in policy to give the NTA extra funding out of the Exchequer, is that it?

No. Let me say the Government has provided nearly €1 billion worth of funding this year.

But it was not giving the NTA extra money to provide additional services.

Budget 2026 set the objective that we needed to rebalance the contribution fare revenue was making. That was part of budget 2026 and that is what is materialising here.

By rebalancing, Mr. Creegan means asking commuters to pay more.

By increasing the fares and recognising that there is going to be, hopefully, a corresponding increase in Exchequer funding as well. There is a common understanding that there needs to be a rebalancing between the two given the changes that have effectively occurred over the past ten years.

Mr. Creegan has said increased money is going to be provided from commuters but how much public money was wasted on delayed, cancelled or failed projects or on money given to consultants or advisers in relation to the various projects?

That is a very wide question to answer. Is the Deputy referring to capital projects?

Capital projects and the IT project.

I know there have been discussions on that already. The Deputy will also be aware that capital funding is completely different to current funding and what we are talking about here is current funding.

Let us just take the IT project then.

If the Deputy is asking me what was written-----

Would it not have been better to eliminate any waste of money and money given to all these advisers, consultants and failed projects, rather than putting the money back onto the commuters?

I am not sure you can make that direct link but I will answer it this way: there are always-----

I want to ask two quick local questions. Is there any planning for a town bus service for the town of Tralee, which is the largest town in the country that does not have such a service?

We are going to look at Tralee. There is a commercial operator in Tralee, as the Deputy knows, so it is a bit different from Monkstown.

In conjunction with the Tralee People's Bus Service.

That obviously makes it slightly more complex.

Is it likely to happen this year or next year?

In terms of determining what we will do in Tralee, yes.

Will it be this year or next year?

We will determine what we will do-----

To have buses running, I mean.

No, I cannot guarantee that.

My final question relates to the 272 route from Tralee to Listowel and Ballybunnion. Recently, many passengers have been left stranded at the MTU because of capacity on the 272 in the evenings. In fairness to local bus services, they put on larger and extra buses for the morning routes into town, but they have been left stranded recently.

Is the NTA aware of that and will it do something about it?

I will pick that up with the operator and see what we can do about it.

Will the NTA provide some extra funding in order that there will be a larger bus or even an extra bus?

We will see what we can do within the funding we have available.

Some of these students and passengers are 30 km or 40 km from home and are let down.

I have been following the meeting remotely. I came up on the 7.45 a.m. train from Limerick.

At the outset, all passengers on those routes from Limerick and Cork, coming in by Limerick Junction, including people from Clare, have been notified in the past week that owing to that really awful accident that took place in Ballyhaunis, County Mayo, some of the carriages normally based in Limerick depot have now been removed from service. You now have shorter trains coming up along that line, which means an early morning scramble that has people holding onto rails and poles on the train when they should not be - it resembles more a Luas at times - and I do not think that is right at this stage. I understand that sometimes, carriages could be caught up in investigation or accident investigation but we need to have long trains in the early morning to capture that full passenger intake in the mornings.

We do not have all the details on it. However, it was a tragic accident. Prior to that accident, all available fleet was in use during the peak hours. If carriages have had to be taken out of service due to some investigation of something, I can see why there is pressure on. We do not have spare carriages at the moment to put on it. We will check out the full position with Irish Rail.

I am generally very complimentary of Irish Rail. From ticket inspector all the way up to CEO, it is a very well-run organisation and it deserves funding. I am not sure that the funding model should be built by putting it on passengers. For anyone who commutes on trains, the ticket fare is only part of the cost incurred on the day; the other cost incurred is the parking charge. Does the NTA have any function in that? That parking charge almost doubled very quietly at the start of this year. It was €3.50 for a 24-hour period and has now gone up to €6. To my knowledge, that did not get any real flagging but it is a cost that everybody has to incur each day they travel.

The parking charged at the station is a decision for Irish Rail and not for the NTA.

It needs to be considered in the whole. As the cost of the ticket has gone up and cost of car parking has doubled, it then gets to a point where people question whether it is viable. The train is viable for one person travelling, but to bring a family to the zoo in the summer, as is an institutional rite of passage, it would not make sense from any corner of the country to load two or three children on the train and bring them up to Dublin. The cost is prohibitive, which means people are back to the car. Cumulatively, all of this means that the M50 and all the junctions coming into Dublin are choked up because people make a binary choice of whether to shell out €120 or €130 or fill the car with €35 worth of petrol or diesel and make their way up to Dublin. Ultimately, it is not getting to where we need to be as a country. Beyond looking at price increases and how this can be fed back in to finance Irish Rail, is any modelling of those consequences being looked at?

Intercity rail travel is probably growing faster than any other sector at the moment. There is a lot of demand out there and regardless of parking charges and fares, people are still using this service.

Has the NTA modelled the consequence I spoke about? People make choices. I did economics for a very short while in college. I was not great at it, but I remember - I think it was called - diminishing returns to scale. If the price of something is increased too much, people just say that it has become a luxury product. Commuting should never be a luxury item that people purchase. Now, people will make choices and decide the car might be cheaper to get to work. That is a total reversal of where our national position was heading towards.

It is a fair point. Fare increases impact passenger demand.

Did the NTA model it?

We know that fares in real terms, taking account of inflation, compared with 2018 are at about two thirds of what they would be if they had kept track with inflation. Fares are considerably lower than they were in 2018 or 2019 in real terms.

Just to add to that, we have complex transport models but also elasticity models that pick up the tail that the Deputy mentioned. We are aware of the broad effect that fare changes have.

Is this subject to review after a certain number of months? When will this next be looked at?

We keep track of passenger numbers on an ongoing basis. Every four weeks, we look at passenger numbers and we publish them as well. They are available online on the NTA website if the Deputy wants to have a look at them. We obviously will keep a close eye on passenger reaction to the fare changes.

We believe we will get some good news this autumn regarding an Ennis town bus service. They have started to put in road markings. Can the NTA give any good news on when that might become operational? Is a contractor finally in place? When might we see those buses moving about in Ennis?

A contractor is in place and we expect a service to be introduced in October.

Will that be in early October?

It will probably be later in October.

That is positive.

I know the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, has the NTA badgered on this, given that it is in his remit. Is there anything more on the railway corridor from Limerick taking in Sixmilebridge, Ennis and on up to Galway? Clare County Council has zoned land and put a lot of money into opening a station at Crusheen. Does the NTA have any view on how that might progress and its possible ability to unlock housing developments?

Is the Deputy talking about the existing line from Ennis to Galway?

Yes.

From memory, I believe we are doing some platform work at various stations there. There is a plan to increase the service level on that line, but I think we need fleet first. I am not sure what the date of introduction for that is. There is a plan to improve it and some infrastructural work is going on. However, I think it largely comes down to rail fleet. We will need more rail fleet to do that.

The last time we met, I made the point that when there was a match or a big concert in Dublin, most people, against their will, had to book a very expensive hotel because they could not travel back down the country. They can do it if they are going north, but they cannot do it if they are going south. There are trains hourly at 4 p.m., 5 p.m., 6 p.m., 7 p.m., none at 8 p.m. but then another one at 9 p.m. Will that 8 p.m. service ever be instituted because it would make so much sense. Will there be a 10 p.m. or an 11 p.m. one?

Adding extra services requires extra funding.

That might be the case with this extra money coming in.

That was my point. However, for 2026, we were unable to do anything on that ground. At least we can look at that for next year and see what is possible.

I thank Mr. Creegan and Mr. Ryan for coming in.

This has been articulated by my colleagues already. I am thinking about the commuters who use trains at Clondalkin, Fonthill, Adamstown and Hazelhatch, which are bursting at the seams and cause health and safety challenges for the passengers using them. There is great disappointment at this fare increase without a commensurate improvement in the services.

In terms of the 140 services that the NTA prioritises, I am struck that the messaging from the NTA is a bit different from what it was a week and a half ago, which was that this was not all necessarily being ring-fenced for new services. I want clarification on that. I am assuming and hoping that prioritisation is being given within those 140 to rapidly growing areas like Clonburris and Adamstown, which we know are under pressure. I am assuming that, within the 140, the NTA has prioritised which are the most important to get additional funding. I am assuming that rail services fall towards the top of that list. I am in particular assuming that, for new growth areas like Clonburris and Adamstown and for people who use Clondalkin and Fonthill, prioritisation is being given to service provision for rapidly growing populations in those areas.

I welcome the consultation on the new bus routes. Expectation has now been created in Clonburris and Adamstown that they will be rolled out. There is an acute health and safety risk on the trains on the Dublin-Kildare line. I know there are plans to make new carriages available for those lines next year. There was an open question over the PSO; I am assuming that has now settled as part of this process. I ask for clarification that it is not just buses but also rail and light rail services that are being included in the services that are being prioritised as part of the 140.

I do not think I said that the fares increase was ring-fenced for additional services.

That was the messaging when this was cascaded first by the NTA. I was also disappointed that there was not more outreach from the NTA on the day of the fare increase announcement to explain the rationale behind it.

It, along with additional Exchequer funding, will support investment in public transport services. The combination of the two is needed to deliver the 140 additional initiatives we have identified for next year.

Has the NTA identified the priority areas? Has it attached that to areas where rapid development is happening and will happen in the next five years?

We have consulted recently on improved bus services in Adamstown, Clonburris and so forth because we are well aware of the expanding populations there. It certainly will be a priority, subject to funding, to introduce those new services.

What about the rail service on the Dublin-Kildare line?

The rail service of the-----

The NTA's own figures show how under pressure those services are.

Absolutely. As the Deputy has mentioned, there are rolling stock constraints there that restrict the ability to introduce new services at the moment.

My understanding from consultation with the NTA and the Department of Transport is that new carriages will be made available towards the back end of next year, which will free up additional capacity on the line.

As we introduce the new battery electric DART fleet on the northern line, carriages will be released, which will be available for the cascade into other lines. A piece of work still needs to be done to identify where exactly and when exactly they will be introduced. In terms of augmenting services on the Kildare line, it will be through cascade of carriages. We have not yet done the work with Irish Rail as to what exactly goes where.

Can that work be prioritised, because I am being constantly contacted by people who say they cannot get on the train in the morning or that they are afraid someone will faint?

That work is getting under way. We are engaging with Irish Rail about priorities in 2027 in relation to new services.

When is it expected the report will be available on that progress?

It will be next year.

Will there be an interim report in the meantime?

We will have to see how we get on with the discussions with Irish Rail. It will take a few months before we can come up with proposals in partnership with Irish Rail.

It strikes me that we will also need to have dynamic timetabling when it comes to the provision of new services. I raised this with Mr. Ryan previously, both at meetings of the committee and privately, and he has been receptive to the idea. I think he was doing some scoping work on it. It would be for areas with longer routes where there is peak demand in the mornings and by the time a bus leaves the first suburb and before it moves onto to the main spine of the route, it has collected so many passengers that it is full. Are we in a position where we could give latitude to operators to pilot new dynamic and responsive schemes? For example, on the C spine in Lucan, if a bus that starts at Adamstown were to start halfway along the route at peak times, it would give people the opportunity to get on. A bus can be full before it reaches the latter end of Lucan and exits the area. Is that something we are looking at as part of this? If we are saying that funding from trains is for provision of services and if operators seem to indicate they are willing to try new things, are we willing to look at that in order to incentivise changes and operational variation?

Where there are capacity issues, we need to serve everyone as best we can. The issue with starting a service on the latter part of a route as opposed to at the start is that people at the start of the route may not have a service. It is not straightforward, especially in an area such as Adamstown, where a lot of the growth is concentrated at the start of the route into Dublin. It is not a straightforward decision-----

There is an existing population in Lucan which, as has been documented, had a full capacity issue too.

There is, but everybody needs to use the bus, new people and those in established areas. The services start in Adamstown and the demand in Adamstown and Clonburris is growing all the time, so it is not a straightforward decision to make to start some services earlier.

Will that modelling take into account traffic variations? There is less traffic on the roads on Mondays and Fridays. That should allow for more dynamic scheduling.

With Dublin Bus, we are looking at introducing a different timetable for Mondays on the C1 and C2 routes because we recognise that the services operate faster on Mondays.

My final question relates to next generation ticketing, which I believe is on schedule for next year. I have raised the data made available from that with Dublin Bus, the NTA and other bodies at previous meetings of this committee. Will that data be made available as open data to allow for analysis of the performance of the overall system and for customers to see how it is performing overall? That would be welcome. It is done in other jurisdictions for transport planning. Does the NTA intend to make that open data?

We intend to publish performance data on our website and make it available-----

Does that include the granular data for analysis by third parties?

It depends how granular the Deputy means. We will certainly provide it by route. I do not know what level of granularity-----

Individual journeys.

I do not-----

Why not?

Technically, I do not know how easy it would be to do that in the first place. I have not seen it in other jurisdictions. However, we are certainly providing much more data and more up-to-date data on both passenger numbers and performance on our website than we did in the past.

It is not that I am trying to crack the whip; it is about trying to build public confidence in the services. We had a whole litany of ghost buses over two years where data was not showing. Ghost buses were being reflected. We need to do an element of confidence building so I urge the NTA to think about how to make that data accessible to be analysed by other parties.

I thank Deputy Moynihan and call Senator Clifford-Lee, who agreed to switch with Deputy O'Gorman.

Like all my colleagues on this committee, I was dismayed by the announcement of these fare increases. The communication was poor. We had no indication beforehand that it would happen. We have had a lot of engagement as individuals and as a committee with the NTA and there was no indication that this was coming. I would like the NTA to reflect on that and maybe give an indication today as to whether this will be a yearly process.

Commuters on the northern commuter line are on the most overcrowded train service in the country. As has been outlined, particularly the commuters in Balbriggan and Skerries are facing a 50% increase in a short period. When the NTA says there have been no increases to fares since 2018, it falls hollow on the ears of people from Balbriggan and Skerries. It is disappointing that, as was outlined today, that there is no budging on this. It is fixed and the NTA is just informing the committee of it. There has been no consultation with the public representatives or commuters in a particular area.

I was concerned when the NTA said it expects a 2% reduction in passenger numbers and that every time the fares go up, there is a corresponding 2% reduction. Where does the NTA think these commuters will go? Will they just stay at home? No, they will move onto the roads. Dublin is already one of the most overcrowded and congested cities in Europe. Our road network cannot take any more passengers. They have to use rail. The residents of north County Dublin have no other option but to use rail, and they are distressed.

What additional capacity will there be on the northern commuter line as a result of these fare increases? We were led to believe in the communications, as has been outlined by colleagues, that these increases would be ring-fenced and used to increase services and that there would be 140 services. It is disappointing that this has not been published in line with the NTA's determination. Can the witnesses give the committee any specific information about the northern commuter line? What additional capacity will there be? Analysis of the 2027 timetable does not indicate to me there will be any additional capacity on the northern commuter line.

Fare changes do not create capacity. We are not for one minute saying that. What does create capacity is changes to the train system. Next year, we will introduce a battery-electric DART fleet on the northern line and the trains have a higher capacity than those in current fleet. They have a capacity that is approximately 50% higher than the current fleet on that line, so they will provide additional capacity. Simply swapping one train for another will immediately provide an uplift in capacity. Then our intention is to improve the frequency on the northern line by adding additional train services. That is our intention. It will not be next year, but we wish to follow through on that.

When will the frequency increase?

I do not want to lock in a date, but I hope that the following year we will be able to do something on adding an additional service, certainly at peak hours.

The language Mr. Creegan is using is not very encouraging. He hopes that the NTA will be able to do something. Why should people pay huge increases in rail fares when there will maybe, the NTA hopes, be a bit of an increase in a few years' time.

Going back to the starting point, the fares increase, along with additional Exchequer funding, allows us to invest further in public transport services, I hope, for everyone. That does not-----

I will just interrupt Mr. Creegan there because I am tight on time. Why should commuters in north County Dublin, who are on the most overcrowded rail service in the country, pay higher fares to improve services in the rest of the country when they have no other option but to use the rail? They are coming into Dublin city to work. They have no option to drive. They are in a congested city. They will not see any benefit.

They will. We are spending hundreds of millions on the DART+ project, including DART+ Coastal North, on that line. Three fleet orders are on the go, one of which will start to come in next year which will immediately change the fleet on the northern line to newer DART fleet with additional capacity.

That has already been announced. There will be no benefit basically for the commuters in north County Dublin relating to these fare increases because what Mr. Creegan outlined was already decided upon and factored in previously.

The fares increase contributes to the new services and the running of the existing system. We need two things to run-----

Mr. Creegan has not said there will be any new services. He said that maybe, he hopes there might be additional capacity in 2028.

I said there will be new fleet on the northern line next year, which will increase the capacity. It is an uplift in capacity for the northern line for the-----

That has already been announced, factored in and decided upon. I want to talk about the fare increase the NTA announced last week. There will be no benefit for users of the northern commuter line. None of the increase in capacity, the 140 improvements, will be for the northern commuter line.

The fares increase contributes to-----

To the rest of the country.

No. It contributes to operating all of the public transport services, which has to include-----

There will be no direct benefit for the people of north County Dublin.

Of course there is.

Mr. Creegan has not outlined it. He talked about DART+. That is welcome and we are looking forward to that, but it has nothing to do with this fare increase, if Mr. Creegan gets what I am saying.

I get what the Senator is saying, but the fares increase goes into an overall pot that pays for the public transport service across the country, which includes the northern line, south-east line, west line and so on.

That is what we are worried about. It is going into an overall pot and will disappear away from north County Dublin. We are not going to get an increased service. Similar to my colleague, Deputy Moynihan, we have areas with huge increases in population and we are not seeing an improved service. While the extra capacity that will be there with the new carriages will be welcome, that is going to be a drop in the ocean. There have been huge concerns, particularly lately, that the trains are shorter and there are only four carriages on trains in the morning. The trains are full at Balbriggan and they still have to go to several other stations after that. There will be no additional benefit for the commuters of north County Dublin. That is clear from Mr. Creegan's answer there.

May I come in on that point? We are going to be introducing, subject to funding, further bus services as part of the BusConnects programme. That is in the ask.

I do not think we have enough time to outline our issues with the BusConnects programme in north County Dublin. I have additional questions for the NTA. I will be in contact with it.

I thank the witnesses for their time today. It is fair to say that the fare increases are disappointing, especially when many people have to rely on often overcrowded services. The justification being given is that the fare increases will go toward funding new services, but the reality is that the only assurance that commuters have at the moment is that the fare increases are going up because those discussions on the new services are all subject to funding. Is there any timeline for when there will be an outcome from those funding discussions?

Funding discussions get settled as part of the budget 2027 process. I am presuming that shortly after budget 2027 is decided, we will be told what our allocation is for next year, which then allows us to put together a final delivery plan for next year, which we hope will include 140 services, but it is dependent upon what funding we get.

Okay. How much does the PSO budget need to be raised by just to maintain services going forward?

We got a €940 million allocation in 2026 for PSO services. The total cost in 2026 of operating the existing services is about €1.5 billion. I am doing a little bit of maths now. I think it will be around €1.65 billion or thereabouts in 2027 to operate the existing services.

How much is required to deliver the additional 140 services?

We have asked for a total of €45 million in 2027.

That is the cost of introducing those new services.

That is the cost of new and enhanced services during 2027.

That includes maintaining those services as well.

To maintain the existing services is included in the previous number.

Is there a figure for that?

I think I gave the figure to the Deputy. It is around €1.65 billion. I can come back and confirm that number with the Deputy.

That is fine. Mr. Creegan said more fare increases were expected in the years ahead. What percentage annual increase in fares is expected?

That has to be decided on a year-by-year basis. All we are flagging is that there will be future fare increases. Zero decisions have been made on what they might be.

The NTA is expecting them.

On the basis that inflation keeps going upward, we are expecting that there will need to be fare increases on a periodic basis.

It is disappointing to hear and signals a lack of commitment from the Department when it comes to the funding of public transport services in the context of a cost-of-living crisis and so on. People are having to rely on overcrowded services. It is very disappointing. I will give one example. I have raised the 7.49 a.m. train to Athenry with the NTA multiple times. It is dangerously overcrowded. People are pushing to get on. They are having to stand face to face with nothing to hold onto. I got an email about this morning's service telling me that a person had fainted due to the heat and the lack of air. This is a problem every single morning. There are only two carriages on that service and we have been told that it will be 2027 at the earliest before additional carriages can be provided. This situation is not sustainable. Can anything be done in the short term to alleviate this problem? That is the question I am getting from the people who have to travel on this train every morning. It is highly dangerous at the moment.

We have raised this directly with Irish Rail on several occasions because we are aware of those kinds of report. The reality is this service is at peak hours, which is when it says there are no spare carriages at all. As I said earlier, next year when we introduce DART services on the northern line from Dublin, that will release other fleet, which is capable of being cascaded. I know that this is one that will be considered for augmentation of the existing train service.

Can Mr. Creegan give a commitment that it will be prioritised for those carriages that come from Dublin? The situation is unacceptable at the moment.

I can give a commitment that we will look at it, knowing its importance, but I do not want to go any further than that here.

I also want to raise the 350 and 351 bus routes. There have been improvements in recent years, which are welcome, but there are still capacity issues and people being left at the side of the road because the buses are full when they come. There are also issues with gaps in the existing timetable. There is no bus between 5.10 p.m. and 7.30 p.m. toward Galway and no bus between 6.15 p.m. and 8.30 p.m. from Galway. That makes it difficult for people attending work or appointments as well as students. It makes it difficult for them to get home at a reasonable time. I know the NTA will have received quite a bit of feedback from passengers and people in the local community about these issues on the service in recent times. Is there any prospect of the timetable being reviewed for that service to make it work a little bit better for commuters? When we are talking about additional services coming forward in years to come, is that something that can be considered as part of that?

We will certainly take that back to the service planning team in relation to the service gap mentioned by the Deputy. Any additional service would, as ever, be subject to funding availability.

Does the NTA review timetables on an ongoing basis? If gaps and issues are identified, is that something the NTA will be willing to respond to?

Yes. If we see them ourselves or if they are raised with us, we will always consider whether something needs to be done or can be done to improve the service.

I hope the NTA will take a look at this. I will continue to correspond with it on that.

Is the NTA disappointed with the failure of the Department to provide the necessary funding? I think it was mentioned earlier that insufficient funding had been provided. I am sure the NTA would like to be able to roll out as many public transport services as it can.

It is important to acknowledge that record funding is already being provided. Almost €1 billion - €940 million - is being provided this year to support the public transport service. More is needed-----

Is it disappointing that the NTA cannot provide new routes?

More is needed to invest at the level we want to invest at.

I thank Mr. Creegan and Mr. Ryan for coming in. I know coming before committees is not easy, and I appreciate it. According to the opening statement, operating costs have risen from €971 million in 2019 to €1.379 billion in 2025. That is an increase of €408 million. Can they share with us where that money is going? We have record passenger numbers and record Exchequer support, as Mr. Creegan has just said. We now have a 15% fare increase. Earlier on, before I was here, I think it was said that it would raise approximately €70 million.

That is still not going to be enough to address the capacity issues and the new services that are required. Where is that money going?

Earlier on, we took an action to provide a detailed breakdown. We will do that. As an overview, as the Deputy will know, there has been a big increase in services across the country. That means extra drivers, mechanics, staff, depots and so on. That is part of it. There has been a major increase in the cost of fuel and in operating costs. That is part of it. There are several other factors like that. We will put down a clear list of what that uplift is made up of but it is those kinds of things. It is staff costs, an enlarged network, additional fuel costs and a variety of other related items.

This has to come back to value for money and what people get from paying their taxes. There is now a fare increase. That level of detail is really important. The amount of money being invested is beginning to sound like Monopoly money. It is not unreasonable for people to want to know where that additional money has gone. In 2019, the PSO subvention was around €300 million. In 2022-23, that went up to about €600 million when you take into account the Revised Estimates. It is now at €940 million. We are now adding another €70 million out of commuters' pockets and we are still not meeting the operating costs the NTA has said we need to meet. We are still not there. It could be as high as €1.65 billion. Does that take into consideration the €45 million the NTA is seeking for new services?

No. That is the cost of existing services in 2027. To go back to the point on value for money, we have done some analysis on this, as I said earlier. From 2018 to 2025, taking account of inflation, the cost per kilometre and cost per passenger have stayed around the same and, in some cases, have decreased. We think we are getting value for money. Could we get better value for money? We are certainly working with the operators on that to see where we can get efficiencies but, as I have said, there has not been an overall decline in efficiency and there is evidence of some improvements in efficiency since 2018.

We might need to talk about value for money specifically in the later session. What happened to the Government compensation for cheaper fares? The NTA has said that fare revenue has fallen from €667 million in 2019 to €576 million in 2025. That is part of the case for increasing the fares. However, when the Government introduced the 20% fare reduction in 2022, did it not explicitly provide additional Exchequer funding to compensate for that fare reduction?

We got a PSO increase that compensated us for that.