Apologies have been received from Deputies Michael Murphy and Cathal Crowe.

The purpose of our meeting this morning is to consider the Supplementary Estimates for the Public Services, Vote 31, Transport. I remind members that the committee has no role in approving the Estimates. It is an ongoing opportunity for the committee to examine departmental expenditure to make the process more transparent and to engage in a meaningful way on relevant performance issues. I thank the Department for providing the briefing note. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Jerry Buttimer, and his officials to the meeting today.

Before I go further, I will read out the note on privilege. 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 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 they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask members partaking via Microsoft Teams that prior to making their contribution to the meeting, they confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus.

I now call on the Minister of State, Deputy Buttimer, to make his opening statement.

I dtús báire, is cúis mhór áthais dom a bheith i láthair inniu. I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before an roghchoiste to discuss the 2025 Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Transport. The Supplementary Estimate is in two parts, a substantive Estimate, voting additional funds to the Department, as well as a technical Estimate. In total, €208.9 million in additional current expenditure funds will be allocated to the Vote.

Taking the substantive supplementary for current expenditure first, €208.9 million will be allocated to public transport services. A total of €211.283 million is needed to address a shortfall in land transport services. However, due to savings of €2.383 million across our non-pay expenditure, this has reduced our substantive supplementary ask to €208.9 million.

I am pleased to see passenger numbers performing so well and expect continued growth in passenger numbers through the remainder of 2025. The Department sets the overall policy direction and funding framework for the delivery of public transport services nationwide.

This supplementary allocation reflects the Government’s commitment to ensuring that public transport services can continue to operate reliably and sustainably in the face of growing passenger demand and increased operational costs. It will also allow for the continued delivery of targeted fare initiatives, including the recently introduced free travel for all children up to the age of nine and the young adult card for those aged between 19 to 25, as part of the NTA’s national fares strategy and funding to ensure the continued delivery of vital transport services across rural areas.

These measures help to ensure that public transport remains accessible and affordable for families, students and young workers across the country. The Department and the NTA continue to review service needs and deployment to support this growth. My Department will continue to maintain robust oversight and performance monitoring of this additional investment.

Turning to the technical supplementary, the Department will receive additional supplementary development contributions held by TII with respect to public transport projects. This funding will allow the Vote to utilise appropriations-in-aid in addition to savings to fund projected expenditure on subhead B4, public transport investment, and specifically MetroLink.

The Railway Procurement Agency, now TII, received Exchequer advances to fund Luas extensions to Cherrywood and the Docklands. TII is now remitting the related supplementary development contribution scheme income which it did not require to fund the projects over their respective periods of construction to the funding authority, namely, the Department of Transport. I propose to allocate this amount to the National Transport Authority for MetroLink-related costs. Today’s Supplementary Estimate will facilitate this arrangement.

It is also proposed to allocate €18,883 million from subhead E3.3, IRCG SAR helicopters non-pay, to offset cost pressures across the Department.

I thank members for their time here today. I commend the Supplementary Estimates to the committee. I am happy to address any questions that members may have.

I thank the Minister of State for appearing before the committee today. In fairness, public transport has come a long way particularly over the past five years. To be honest, it was shocking and dismal prior to that. We have to look at where we are and it is a success. I wonder if we are using our budget correctly. That needs to be looked into. I see some great new services including in my own area in west Cork. There is no point in denying that. We have four new services coming out of Mizen Head that were never there before, which is incredible. The same is true of the Beara Peninsula and the Sheep's Head Peninsula.

However, there are areas where we could deliver further and which might actually be done under the current budget at the present time. I refer to areas like Caheragh and Drinagh that have no service passing their door any day of the week but rural transport is passing them within maybe five minutes at the same time in other areas. While I do not think we are going to make any savings as such, we should certainly look at public transport in areas like that, which are completely omitted from having any public transport service passing their door. Most places in Ireland would expect to get some kind of bus service and they are continually saying to me that is not happening in their communities. We need to look at having a budget for public transport in areas that do not have a connection to rail and probably will never have rail.

Many rural communities in the area where I live are 140 km away from rail. That is an astonishing situation. There is not even a budget for a sign showing where the nearest railway station is, which is Cork city. For myself, I come straight to Dublin by car. There is no point in driving two hours and then hopping on a train. There is a point in keeping going while you are at it.

There is no point in me coming in here saying to the Minister of State that there should be a budget to bring light rail to west Cork. I do not think that will ever happen. Even though it came to Schull at one time, incredibly, it is not going to happen going forward. However, there should be a public transport bus connection to rail every morning. Everyone in this country should have a God-given right. I should not have to come in here, meaning no disrespect to others, to talk about improving rail or improving the amount of time rail costs the communities when we do not even know what it means. Is there to be such a budget? I have brought up here on numerous occasions the need to connect communities that will never have a train but certainly could have a bus-to-train transport service. That is where we need to focus here. There is no point in me spending my time talking about bringing rail to communities when it is never going to happen. Has the Minister of State a budget in place for that to happen out of this Supplementary Estimate?

I thank Deputy Collins. The Deputy is right. We have seen many parts of Cork county now connected. I have met with representatives in the Caheragh-Drinagh area who are concerned at the lack of a bus service and we are looking at that.

I suppose there are two parts to the Deputy's question. First, as the Minister of State with responsibility for rural transport, I am ambitious and want to see connectivity enhanced. We have the public service obligation, PSO, which is the overarching funding. We have a well developed plan, Connecting Ireland. It requires ongoing resourcing, both human and financial. If you take it in the context, as the Deputy said, of from where we have come, we have seen an increase in passenger numbers and connectivity. I should pay tribute to the former Minister, Eamon Ryan, for his vision in terms of driving the whole piece around rural transport. We have made significant progress. We are very much driven by the need to have people connected. We cannot get everybody from a bus to a train but the ambition is there. We have seen in Cork, as the Deputy sees from Mallow and An Gleanntán to Midleton, an enhancement of the services.

We will not have an historical debate about the west Cork railway line. The Deputy and I would probably agree on that. In hindsight, maybe that should never have been closed.

We have made significant progress. The important point, for me and for the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, and the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, in the Department is that we must ensure that public service obligation, that Local Link piece, is continuing to uplift, to connect people and to ensure people have that accessible transport and connectivity.

I appreciate that. I am on the board of Local Link and was on the board of rural transport prior to that in a voluntary capacity before I got into politics so it was not the political side that drove me; it was delivery. While it is progressing and I do not want to come in here with any kind of real negativity on it, you could see where those improvements could be made without even an added cost where an area could be included. I have put forward suggestions. At one time when it was the local transport company was in charge of things, you could get somewhere. You tend to not get anywhere today. The Minister of State needs to look at that in the budget that is there because the budget must be huge. There is no point in saying it is not costing a lot of money but people are using it.

I look at West Cork Connect. Damien Long rejuvenated and reopened transport in west Cork. Nobody else wanted to touch it. As soon as he did, Bus Éireann and all the rest wanted to follow suit. That is fine. There was no problem, but there are 20, 25 or 30 people waiting for a bus on the side of the road. It is great. It is a real positive, but I do not want areas such as Caheragh, Drinagh and Ballincarriga left behind when they could be included in new routes that are being put in place and that are not far away. I put that suggestion to the Minister of State. There should be no community left behind when it comes to public transport. Even if it is once or twice a day, it is at least something to start with. Some of these communities are being left behind.

I would not close a door on a direct transport service to the train station. Let no one come into the Dáil and say that they are connecting Ireland when there are some communities that do not have a connection within 140 km. That has to be looked at. There has to be an understanding that no Government is going to deliver rail to the people of west Cork but we certainly need a public transport connection to rail, and maybe the airport in Cork, on a daily basis. These services are hugely important for our future. I would appreciate it if the Minister of State were to take that on board for future budgets.

I share Deputy Collins's ambition for west Cork. I would be happy to meet with the Deputy and the committee. Councillor Caroline Cronin had me down there during the summer. The Deputy is right. Damien Long has made a hugely positive impact for people in west Cork. As part of BusConnects and as part of the Connecting Ireland piece, there is a need for a detailed examination to develop what the Deputy discussed, if possible. As a Minister of State, given that I am from Cork, I am very much of the view that we need to look at how we can enhance services for people.

As a Government, we are funding smart demand responsive transport for remote areas which will extend the reach of rural transport further. Everywhere I go across the country, people are praising Local Link. They want more of it and I certainly hope we can deliver that.

I take the Deputy's points on board. I would be happy to go to west Cork to meet with the people in those areas. It is an important part of west Cork, even from a tourism point of view and from an economic point of view, but from a human perspective, it is one that we should look at.

Go raibh maith agat, a Aire Stáit. I call Deputy Daly.

I thank the Minister of State for coming in. Meaning no disrespect to Deputy Buttimer, we were expecting that the Minister would be here and maybe we should have got more notice of that. The Minister was not there for Oral Questions last week and he is not here this morning.

I have a few questions. I see that €211.283 million extra has been allocated for public transport services. I came up on the train this morning. Apart from the Dublin-to-Cork and Dublin-to-Belfast trains, there is still no trolley service on those trains. One would think that, with an extra budget of that amount, that could be facilitated at this stage. Are there any plans to do that?

There were leaks during the summer from the Department that we would have to choose between infrastructure and fare reduction. Fare increases for 2026 have not been ruled out. Will the Minister of State guarantee that there will not be fare increases?

Those are my two initial questions. One is in relation to the trolley service and the other is whether the Minister of State will guarantee that there will not be fare increases because, as he stated in his opening statement, public transport needs to be accessible and affordable for families.

In terms of the catering trolley, it has been raised in parliamentary questions and on Commencement matters in the Seanad. Funding should be prioritised for public transport services. Catering is viewed as an ancillary service but in my opinion, as somebody who has used the train, there should be no deficit in the provision of catering on a variety of routes. It is important to recognise that the travelling public should have that level of service. It is not good enough to say that you can by a cup of coffee or tea on the platform and have to take it onto the train.

It has been costed at approximately €2 million to restore those services. In my view, there should be direct employees of Iarnród Éireann performing that service. When there is €211 million, one would think it would be an easy fix to do on the more peripheral areas. If you were going for a medical appointment in Dublin on the Castlebar train, the Ballina train or the Tralee train where you are on the train for four hours, you do not want to be changing trains. You take the direct train and you cannot even buy a bottle of water. One would think there would be a spare €2 million out of the €211 million to do that.

I am not disagreeing with the Deputy but I would make the point that the amount of money he speaks about relates to the provision of a public transport service. This is seen as ancillary. Maybe the model should be examined in the context of franchising.

The Minister of State is not going to guarantee that it will be happening in the new year.

I cannot give the Deputy a commitment this morning on that.

What about the leaks that took place suggesting fare increases have not been ruled out for 2026? Can the Minister of State guarantee that the fares will not be increased, given that he has said the measures must ensure public transport remains affordable? There has been, as he said in his opening statement, growing passenger demand. To continue to have that demand and to avoid the problems with the M50 we all saw on “Prime Time” last night, there is a need to at least maintain, but ideally increase, the passenger numbers on public transport. Will the Minister of State guarantee that the increases will not take place in the new year?

What I will say this morning is that public transport needs to be funded. There are basically two sources of funding: fares and the Exchequer. We need to have a debate on the funding of public transport. We are having it. As the Deputy knows quite well, we have seen a huge increase in passenger numbers. The “Prime Time” programme last night illustrated that we have a capacity issue on our roads. That is why we have Connecting Ireland, BusConnects and the plans for Dublin, Cork and Galway. The plan for a Luas in Cork-----

The Minister of State is not ruling out fare increases, so.

I am not ruling anything out because I am not in a position this morning to give the Deputy a definitive answer, other than to say-----

That is disappointing.

----the Government has committed to enhancing and increasing public transport. We have taken initiatives in terms of fares that have given-----

I will cut the Minister of State off here because I have less than two minutes left. He said the Government recently introduced free travel for children up to age nine. Will he and the Minister commit to extending the scheme to private buses, particularly in rural areas, so people who do not have access to State-provided public transport will be able to use commercial operators?

The short answer is “Not at this juncture”.

On the fares, the OECD is coming in to review the funding model next year, so we will have a further competition. It is important to have the conversation. The one thing the Deputy will have seen from this Government is a commitment to public transport and fare initiatives.

I have one more question. The Minister of State is aware the average cost of an electric vehicle, EV, is over €50,000, and many cost €60,000 to €70,000. People buying those types of cars do not need a €3,500 grant. Are there proposals, given the extra money, to introduce a tiered system so people around the country, not just those in the more affluent areas of Dublin and Cork, will be able to buy cars? Maybe there should be a tiered system for rural areas and for cars that do not cost as much as those I have mentioned?

It is a fair point. We need to incentivise people to transition to EVs. As of now, there are no plans to have a tiered approach, but I will certainly have people come back to the Deputy on that.

One of the commuters on the “Prime Time” programme last night was coming from the north west, from Cavan. What are the plans to extend rail transport through County Meath and up to the north west, including Cavan and Donegal?

In that context, we have the all-island rail review, as the Deputy knows. We saw the plans announced for Navan. It is all part of the discussion. We will examine the whole issue. The “Prime Time” programme has illustrated that an all-Ireland strategic rail review is necessary. The whole point is getting people out of the car and onto public transport. The Department is committed to that.

I am next on the speaking rota. I will ask my questions and then the Minister of State may respond.

First, bearing in mind that we are dealing with a Supplementary Estimate, what provisions have been put in place for next year, in terms of overall budget allocation and forecasting, to ensure we will not have a similar Supplementary Estimate in a year's time?

Second, the Minister of State's note stated fare revenue is not where it needs to be. In which aspects of the public transport system are fare receipts down compared with last year's receipts or with the forecasted receipts?

Third, what are the main drivers of the increase in the PSO cost? The Minister of State referred in his overview to contract costs, energy costs and so on. Could he give more detail on what is driving the overall increase?

My final question is on the €71 million in TII funds that will be allocated for MetroLink. Could I have more detail on what exactly that money will be used for?

Could I have the questions again? The Chair was going a bit fast.

First, what are the measures to improve budgeting and forecasting for next year so we will not have a similar Supplementary Estimate again next year? Second, where is fare revenue not matching what was forecast and why is fare revenue this year down by comparison with what was forecast? Third, what are the main drivers of the PSO cost increase? Fourth, where exactly will the €71 million in TII funding for MetroLink be used?

These developments entail a contribution scheme put in place by local authorities, which collect the money in terms of the fares and transmit to the statutory transport provider. The practice has been that every few years the Department has instructed the transport provider to remit the money to the Department. The last occasion was around 2017.

The significant uplift for the PSO next year is around €940 million. Fare revenue is below what it might have been due to the fare initiatives. Passenger numbers are very good overall but the fare initiatives have taken money out of the system. The PSO cost drivers include service expansion, input costs and fuel costs. These costs have increased.

It is difficult to give the Deputy a definitive answer on how we can ensure we will not be here next year. I believe there will always be a Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Transport. In this regard, it is a bit like the Department of Health. It is passenger led and a matter of demand. It is about the PSO. There is a commitment in the programme for Government to developing a sustainable funding model. The package we are introducing today involves a commitment to ensuring accessible public transport across the board.

To return to fares, is the Minister saying the expansion of the Leap card to children aged between five and eight brought down the overall fare receipts forecast? Surely that was costed in. Is there a softening in demand? If the main reason for fare revenue being below what was forecast is the expansion of the Leap card to children aged between five and eight, was it not factored in when the programme was introduced? Was it done mid-year?

I did not quite follow the Minister of State regarding what exactly the €71 million being transferred from TII to MetroLink will be used for.

The MetroLink allocation is for general MetroLink costs.

Like what?

I would have to revert to the Chair on that. I would not have the specific detail.

If the Minister of State could revert to me on it, it would be good.

I would not have the data here.

There is no softening of demand. We must ensure public transport is reliable and accessible, and, as Deputy Collins mentioned, that it connects people. We are ambitious about expanding services through BusConnects and the overarching Connecting Ireland element.

The fare initiatives have generally had an impact on revenue. This is the case with the free travel scheme, which has also been extended. Both schemes are quite good in that they are getting people onto public transport.

They are great.

They have had an effect.

I am not digging at either of them at all. They are two great schemes. I am a big fan of them. I am just trying to understand why the cost of them was not projected a year ago and why it is impacting on the revenue. If it is the case that passenger demand is not softening, that is fantastic. That is great but it is not what I want explained. I was surprised to see lower than expected fare revenue coming in and I am trying to get the bottom of what is driving that. Is it that these initiatives have impacted fare revenue in some cases? Surely, that would have been costed when those programmes were being rolled out.

It would be costed. In real time there is that real-life cost implication. What we are trying to do here is balance the provision of public transport, making it affordable for people, while at the same time recognising we are committed to increasing public transport across the board.

I agree 100%.

I will have my officials come back to the Leas-Chathaoirleach with further details on that.

That would be really useful. Just to state for the record, I am not digging at either of those schemes.

No.

I think they are excellent schemes. If we are going to expand schemes like that. we would like to think fare revenue should be ahead of forecast or at least in line with forecast, especially if we are bringing in initiatives to expand the use of public transport and costing those in advance of development. I thank the Minister of State. Deputy O'Gorman is next.

I thank the Minister of State for joining us. When the date for this session was first set, the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, indicated he could only give us an hour and a half of his time, then earlier this week he indicated he had a Cabinet meeting today. Is that why he is not present?

I am not sure. I was asked to substitute and I agreed. I apologise to the Deputy if he is discommoded. I certainly do not mean any disrespect to him or the committee.

Of course not and we are always delighted to have the Minister of State here. It is just that it is part of the constitutional role of this committee to have oversight of the Estimates. It is a significant Estimate coming in today. My understanding is the Cabinet meeting took place yesterday, so I was a little bit surprised that the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, was not available to speak to the committee today.

A significant Estimate of €208 million is being sought here, and for good purposes. Under subhead B3.1, what was the original budget 2025 allocation for this subhead? I am just trying to get an estimate of where we started and where we are ending for 2025.

It was €658.442 million.

It was €658 million and we are adding €208 million to that, so we are ending the year just over €864 million.

Yes.

For 2026, what is the estimated budget?

It is €940 million.

Is that for the entire B heading or is that for B3.1?

It is like for like, yes.

It is like for like so there is some room for growth between what we actually came in for in 2025 and what we have budgeted for in 2026. There is some room for growth in terms of-----

Yes, there is also room for growth on costs.

We saw a €200 million increase in demand between what was allocated for 2025 and what we need for 2025. We do not really have that much headroom in 2026, do we? We have maybe €70 million. Is that the headroom there at the moment?

Plus or minus. It is in the ballpark, yes.

I am just concerned, and Deputy Daly raised the issue of fare increases as well, if we see costs continuing to rise and have limited headroom in terms of what is budgeted for 2026 to deliver the same level of services, is there a risk of either fare increases or a likelihood of coming back to the committee with another significant Supplementary Estimate next November?

My answer to the Deputy is the same one I gave to Deputy Daly. I will preface it again by saying the OECD will be coming in to look at this, in terms of the review of funding models. I cannot give any definitive answer this morning. What I can say to the Deputy is, as he knows quite well, public transport is funded from two sources, namely, fares and the Exchequer. The Deputy was part of a Government that was very instrumental in driving reform of public transport and a commitment to that. This Government is the same.

When is the OECD coming in?

The start of next year.

The start of 2026.

Yes, in terms of that review of the funding model. We need to have that conversation about public transport and fares, in terms of the collective. It is about that exchange of views. Obviously, some people will definitely be looking at the whole cost. I cannot give the Deputy that definitive answer this morning.

That is fine. Yesterday and today, a number of measures are being announced in terms of significant reforms in the delivery of infrastructure. No doubt public transport is included in that. The transport plan was announced last week. In that announcement we saw allocations for projects that have already been granted planning permission, such as the Luas Finglas which was granted planning permission only four weeks ago. DART+ South West was granted planning permission a year ago. We see decisions that Luas Finglas will only go to procurement in 2027 and DART+ South West in 2028, with Luas Finglas starting in 2029 and DART+ South West starting in 2030 plus. On the planning side, these projects are out the gap. They have received their planning permission and are ready to go. Can the Minister of State understand my confusion and the very real frustration felt by commuters in Finglas, south Dublin and across Kildare in terms of planning permission having been granted and yet there being this inordinate delay of four or five years before we go to construction? Can the Minister of State explain that because I just cannot?

First, I agree with the Deputy completely that we need to look at accelerating delivery. That is why today the Government is announcing its accelerating infrastructure development plan.

The Luas Finglas project was funded under the previous NDP for planning and design, and its construction start date under the approved greater Dublin area, GDA, transport strategy was for the post-2030 period. The real time means that, under the NDP, we are bringing forward the construction start date, which I think we all agree is important. That is an important one.

In regard to the DART+ South West project delay, it is a hugely important programme. We will see construction start on it under the NDP. We have already had the first of the new trains in Ireland undergo testing which will introduce a massive uplift in capacity on the network. The point the Deputy is making is that we all need to see and want to have accelerated delivery of projects. He is right. It is frustrating and it does impact on people. We, as politicians, want to see projects, and certain capital infrastructure projects, expedited so we can have delivery for the people.

Yes, and the Minister of State is absolutely right to put that focus on accelerating delivery, but the transport plan for these two projects is decelerating delivery. It is actually adding years to the delivery of these projects, projects that have planning permission. Over the next number of days there will be a big debate about the planning system and various groups, environmentalists, etc., will be blamed for delaying planning. Here, it is not the environmentalists or judicial review; it is a Government decision to hold off funding on these particular projects that is failing commuters in Finglas, south Dublin and across Kildare.

I do not necessarily think the Deputy is right on that one. If we look at it, we need DART+ West first because it fixes the capacity issues in the city centre and also allows for the construction of the new depot to house the new fleet, which will be important to serve other projects. We both share the overarching goal and philosophy which is that we must deliver projects more quickly, accelerate delivery and increase the reliability for passengers.

I just want to express my disappointment that the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, has not appeared. I will start with the sectoral investment plan. I welcome that funding has been allocated to the western rail corridor. It has been a very long time coming and is a very important project for the west and it is key that we actually see the project delivered within the lifetime of the Government. I know there is an aim to start construction by 2028, but does the Department have any specific target for when the project will be delivered?

The focus is to get it started. I do not have the exact date in front of me here but I will ask the officials to come back to the Deputy on that.

In terms of extending that onwards to Sligo, from Claremorris to Collooney, will that be looked at or reviewed, say, in the lifetime of this Government?

I am sure that will be looked at in the national rail strategy, but there are no plans at the moment.

Another very important rail project in the west is the double-tracking of Athenry to Galway. We have the passing loop at Oranmore being developed, but there are significant capacity issues on the route and, particularly with the reopening of the western rail corridor, there will be a lot of pressure if we have increased services in and out of Galway. Why was that particular project not included in the sectoral plan?

The sectoral plan did not refer to specific projects per se in terms of what the Deputy refers to. What we are committed to doing, as he saw, is enhancing the service provision. The overarching issue-----

There were a number of projects mentioned within that plan specifically, so I am just querying this particular project, the double-tracking of rail between Athenry and Galway. Where does that stand?

The answer is "I do not know" because I do not have that information in front of me for the Deputy but I will certainly come back to him on the matter. We are dealing with the Supplementary Estimate as opposed to individual projects.

In that regard, what rationale went into deciding which projects would be prioritised over others in that plan?

In the-----

The sectoral investment plan.

The investment plan or the capital plan is about ensuring we have, first of all, a plan for infrastructure in the country. Second, it was based on the needs of the different regions. It is about how you can enhance public transport provision, for example, BusConnects or Connecting Ireland. Third, it is about ensuring - the Deputy mentioned the western rail corridor - that we connect people and get people out of cars and onto public transport and-----

May I ask about the Galway ring road, which was mentioned in that plan? The Minister, Deputy O'Brien, stated recently that he would seek an update as to when we could expect a final decision on that project. Does the Department have an update on that?

It is currently in the planning system. We have a framework called the national investment framework for transport in Ireland, NIFTI, which sets out the prioritisation approach and the progress of projects in terms of different stages of their life cycles.

Since the Minister sought an update on that, has the Department received an update on when that decision will be expected?

The short answer is "No".

No. Okay.

I will move on to the PSO funding. When the Minister was before this committee, he outlined that €658 million was allocated to PSO funding for 2025. Since then, we have had media coverage of a potential shortfall in the 2025 PSO fund and that the costs of providing PSO services were outstripping the funding provided by the Government. This funding gap was confirmed by the Department back in September. Do these Supplementary Estimates confirm that this funding shortfall was €211 million?

Yes.

When did the Department become aware of this funding shortfall?

As part of the budgetary process.

The main reason I ask about this is that the Minister was able to make quite a great deal of claims around increases to PSO funding in the budget. Now, we see that the PSO was actually underfunded by €200 million this year. I know the Minister has stated that there was a 43% increase in PSO funding, but given these Supplementary Estimates, which the Department already knew were needed, does that claim of a 43% increase still stand?

Yes, of course. We should be happy to see a 43% increase in 2025. It is €658.442 million, as I said earlier.

If you look at these Estimates, the increase is actually about 8%. Would the Minister of State not agree with that?

No, I would not agree with the Deputy.

Is that not what the figures suggest?

It is about allocation, as the Deputy knows, and we have allocated €658.442 million.

When you look at what was actually spent versus what has been allocated, is it not misleading to suggest there has been that much of an increase?

No.

Okay. We will agree to disagree on that one.

Fair enough, but the reality is that we have seen a commitment in the budget and in the Department in terms of PSO funding, and that is black and white. The Deputy cannot disagree with that.

Can the Minister of State outline how much of the 2026 PSO funding will go towards providing new public transport services?

That is being reviewed by the Department and will be published in due course.

I want to raise a recent revelation about legal costs approaching €250,000 in the ongoing dispute between the DAA's board and its CEO. I know this committee has sent an invitation to the DAA management to appear here but I just want to understand if the Minister of State or the Minister have met the CEO or the chair of the board, if they have had any interaction with them-----

Why is that relevant to the Estimates we are discussing, out of interest? I am just curious. The context of the question is-----

This is a State company.

The answer is that I have not met the chair of the board.

Does the Minister of State know whether the Minister has?

The Minister, to be fair, probably has been in communication with the board.

Specifically about these issues?

In terms of the €250,000 in legal fees, is it?

Yes.

Again, I do not have that information to hand. That is not part of the Supplementary Estimate for today, but it is important that Deputy O'Brien, as the line Minister, engage with the board of the DAA. That is not unusual. I do not have the information the Deputy has referred to in terms of the specific matter he raises.

I call Deputy Boland.

The Minister of State is very welcome. Following on from the Leas-Chathaoirleach, I want to ask the Minister of State a little about the lower fare revenue performance. Passenger numbers are performing very well, with further growth expected, yet we have lower fare revenue performance and I would really like to understand why that is. It is a fairly significant supplementary amount of money the Department is looking for. I am a huge supporter of public transport. I take public transport. I got the train here today. I am one of those TDs who uses public transport. Unfortunately, however, in my area, instead of having lower fares, our fares have substantially increased. I am talking about Skerries and Balbriggan. We are not benefiting from the €2 fare. We are not benefiting from affordable and accessible public transport, as stated in the programme for Government, because our fares have substantially increased. I am a bit concerned. Our services have decreased. We have fewer train carriages. No new train carriages have been ordered since 2022 and the ones that have been ordered have not been delivered. There have been no new buses, either Dublin Bus or Bus Éireann, I understand, since 2022. We are putting a huge amount of money into the PSO levy but I am not seeing that in return for services, and my constituents are seeing it not in lower fares but in increased fares. The Minister of State might please give us a little more understanding as to why we are looking for such a huge increase in the Supplementary Estimate.

The PSO programme, as the Deputy knows, is funded through a combination of Exchequer funding and passenger fare revenue. The fare revenue is not the main driver in 2025. The commitment is to service expansion. As regards things necessitated today, we have service expansion, we have cost increases, as the Leas-Chathaoirleach already said, and we have had, if we are honest, underfunding in recent years. Since Covid, there has been a need to review the whole structure. That has been the driver in terms of the costs. From a Government perspective, and as a Department, we are committed to ensuring that fares are competitive. I take the Deputy's point about the areas she refers to in terms of reduction in carriages-----

A substantial increase in train fares. We are subsidising the reduction in fares further up the line and the €2 fare in Dublin, and that is just not right, particularly now when we are looking to put in a Supplementary Estimate of over €208 million.

We are, as a Government, committed to the fare initiatives. I could, as the Deputy knows quite well, list what we have done and its benefits.

We must continue to review existing fare structures to ensure public transport is accessible for everyone and the delivery of services are supported. We also need to do more to incentivise and encourage people to use the off-peak period. Under the programme for Government, we are also committed to the roll-out of contactless fare payments on all public transport. What we have committed and tried to do is keep fares low and affordable, as well as examine the further expansion of free public transport for children. We will then look at the whole sustainability of the model in terms of the PSO services into the future.

I thank the Minister of State. My time is limited, so I am just going to come back to him on the three points. Obviously, I have highlighted the fact that the fare increases in my area are not fair. The Minister of State mentioned keeping the fares under review. I have, on many occasions, discussed this with the NTA. I wrote to the NTA and asked for formulas to explain its decision. I am getting nowhere and I am wondering whether the Minister of State can help me get the fare determination looked at fairly.

I am certainly happy to take that back.

I thank the Minister of State. I very much appreciate that.

I am happy to do that. The Government is committed and is trying to have a fairer fare system. That involves bringing in change and moving to a more equitable transport system that is transparent and distance-based. The downside for the Deputy is that-----

We will not get into it here but I have already contested this with the Minister, Deputy Darragh O’Brien, Mr. Meade and Mr. Hugh Creegan. They agreed that it is not on a distance-travelled basis. I will not go into the examples again.

To be fair-----

Mr. Doocey knows them well.

-----to the Deputy, she has been articulate in advocating for her constituents in the Skerries and Balbriggan areas. She did it last week in the Dáil as well.

In terms of the service, obviously, we have reduced train lines. I know there are issues with the train carriages. It looks like we are not going to get the new carriages until quarter 2 of 2027 at the earliest. We should look, if we can, at leasing rolling stock to try to supplement the train carriages we have. We need to look at everything we can do because the demand is there on all lines. The fact that we do not have new carriages means we cannot cascade the other carriages onto all of the other lines in the country. We need to look at what we can do. We are expecting a growth in numbers over the next couple of years but we simply do not have the buses and train carriages to meet that demand. Despite this, we are putting over €208 million into the PSO levy without additional infrastructure.

The short answer is that I agree with the Deputy. We need to look at options. I certainly commit to engage with the NTA and the Department on the matters she has raised this morning.

I appreciate that. Lastly, the Minister of State mentioned off-peak services. The last train to Drogheda and Dundalk is 20 minutes to midnight during the week, which means I regularly miss my last train home. It would be great to see more off-peak services. When I get the last train, which is regularly, there is quite a demand. Having the last train to Drogheda and Dundalk on the northern commuter line at 11.40 p.m. is just not sufficient, certainly for anyone working in Leinster House. I would appreciate it if off-peak services could be looked at.

I am giving the Deputy a personal view as opposed to a departmental one. We need to be radical in how we look at the delivery of off-peak services. I have the same issue in my constituency with, for example, workers and passengers at Cork Airport. The points the Deputy made are relevant. I certainly would love to see a more innovative, radical approach taken to off-peak services. We can have more of them. I have raised the matter with the NTA in the case of Cork, rather than the Deputy's constituency, but this may be something on which we can work and advocate together with the NTA. The Deputy makes a good point because we need to encourage people to use public transport rather than putting barriers in people's way. For example, the Deputy could have driven, although I know she said she took the train this morning, because she knows she will not make the train back home tonight. It is a fair point.

I am staying in town tonight because I know I will not make the last train home.

We will go back to Deputy Currie. After Deputy Currie, I will go to Deputy Aird and then we will do a second round. We should be done then. I call Deputy Currie.

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for being here. The Minister of State said that the €211 million covers increased energy costs, wage growth, network expansion and lower fare revenue performance. Can he speak to the service expansion element? What was covered in that €211 million in terms of extra spend?

First, it is about maintaining the service as it is. Second, the F spine is being unfurled and then there is the whole overarching umbrella of Connecting Ireland. As I said, the key cost drivers in terms of the higher PSO payments are energy, wages and network expansion. The allocation is a reflection of the Government’s commitment to reliable sustainable public transport and increasing connectivity. It is also about making sure that we roll out the two new BusConnects spines, the E spine and, in particular, the F spine. Those two new services under Connecting Ireland will be rolled out later this year or early next year. There is then the whole piece around Mullingar and Ennis which are due to commence, maybe, in quarter 1 of next year but there is no definitive date on that yet. That is part of where we are expanding the services.

The NTA was before this committee and, obviously, my focus is Dublin West. It stated that its objective is to make what we have work. There are severe capacity issues in Dublin West, however. That was not helped by the fact that, over the last five years, in the previous term, there was an absolute lack of investment in capacity issues in Dublin West, both in existing services and areas where new housing has been built. I have been able, with the NTA, to secure an additional €700,000 this year for capacity issues in Dublin West but it is still not enough. The Minister of State mentioned earlier the underfunding in the last couple of years. We saw the “Prime Time” programme last night regarding the M50. We also see return to office mandates and an increase in congestion on our roads in the last couple of months. There is a major drive and interest in using public transport. Where does the Minister of State see all of this going?

The Deputy raises an interesting point in asking where we see all of this going. First, I agree with her that we need to ensure the focus is on maintaining the network in terms of better punctuality and increased capacity and reliability. If we learned anything from the “Prime Time” programme last night, it is that this has an implication, and the Deputy has been a long-time champion of working from home. It also requires us to continue to fund and increase the funding for BusConnects to deliver it and have it rolled out to ensure the significant progress we all agree has been made continues. That is why the programme for Government is very much committed to ensure that BusConnects delivers. Today, that is why we have the transport accelerated development plan being put in place because all of us benefit from having enhanced public transport that is reliable and punctual.

It is also about continuing to work with the Deputy and others to ensure there is an augmented and enhanced upgrade of the bus fleet so that we can have that critical piece, which is reliability and accessibility. The key point for me, based on the Deputy’s experience of Dublin West, is that we continue with the network redesign programme and ensure we are a bit radical, a word I used earlier, when it comes to local routes. We need to look at how we can take some of the existing services and not just streamline the network but deliver for the people.

Undoubtedly, the programme last night raised issues with the M50.

There is no magic wand. We are-----

I only have two minutes. Dublin West is not going to see the roll-out of the bus route redesigns under BusConnects until 2027. We need investment in our existing services particularly in areas with new housing growth. Hollywoodrath currently has one bus service, the 40E, and it connects to Broombridge Luas station. The bus only comes every half an hour. I get emails about congestion, bus stops mobbed with people, the visible frustration of people waiting for buses at those bus stops and the knock-on effect in the area. We are getting the extension of a bus, the 40D, which I have pushed for since I became a TD, from Tyrrelstown to Hollywoodrath in March. This typifies what is happening with new housing growth and new areas. They do not get the investment they need when it comes to bus services. We feel deprioritised because we will not see BusConnects roll out until 2027.

The points the Deputy articulated about people's experiences on the existing network are not acceptable. People are suffering, disappointed and frustrated. I know the Deputy has raised the whole piece around people feeling discommoded in the Dáil on a number of occasions and in the Seanad when she was there. I will take her views back to the NTA today. It is about next year delivering a key focus on what the Deputy has articulated but also on seeing an improvement in existing services. It goes back to my three points earlier. It is about punctuality, capacity and reliability. The travelling public the Deputy represents and speaks about are justifiably upset and disappointed.

When those buses arrive late, you can imagine what happens at those locations.

Absolutely. We have similar issues in parts of Cork which people articulate to me and others. It is part of where we need to see the joined-up approach. I will take the Deputy's points back to the NTA today.

I call Deputy Aird. He has five minutes and then we will do our second round.

It is very interesting because it will be over €208 million. I asked myself what value for money will we get from €208 million. I will have to vote on this eventually in the Dáil. We in Laois got no money at all for the roads or anything like that. I said if I got some portion of that €208 million, it could be very good. I can see the Minister of State looking at me. Look back at the statistics; I did not get anything out of the last tranche.

I thank all of the people who run public transport at the moment. I use public transport. I do not just talk the talk, I walk the walk. I use public transport every day. The only time I cannot use public transport is when the Dáil sits after 10.30 p.m. because I cannot get the train home to Portlaoise. The last one is at 10.10 p.m. We were kept here last week until 1.40 a.m. and then we are talking about the carbon footprint. We should have a look at ourselves from that point of view. With the traffic congestion at the moment, I speak to people in my own town of Portlaoise and in County Laois. They can get public transport to their jobs, mostly people travelling up around Dublin, but other people travel the other direction down to Limerick. My point is those people do not want to be sitting in traffic. Leaving Portlaoise at the moment, if you want to be in Dublin at 8 a.m., you now have to leave at 4.20 a.m. There is no quality of life attached to that sort of commitment that person has to make. That is the gridlock. I often wonder, if Ministers used public transport and their ordinary car once a week - I think every Minister should have to use their ordinary car every Wednesday if they come up from the country - then they would see the gridlock. Then we should see changes very quickly. When you are able to motor in and out with the blue lights on, there is no headache for you. People are sitting there - a young girl told me yesterday morning it took her three and a half hours from 4.50 a.m. to get to work. She cannot get public transport to work. She has to bring her car. She would love to have public transport. There has to be joined-up thinking. We cannot just continue what is going on at the moment. There are more and more cars, lorries and vans on the roads every morning. We can all see that. I did not see the programme last night - I was on public transport on my way home when it was on. I ask the Minister of State to please do something about. It has to be done. Those people commuting are entitled to some form of a standard of living, not to be up and on the road at 5 a.m., coming home at 9 p.m., maybe 8 p.m., having to look after children. It is not fair to them. The Department is looking for €208 million. Show us what it can do to improve the quality of life for those people.

The hop-on, hop-off bus is fantastic. It is only after coming into Portlaoise. It is absolutely brilliant. Some people voiced their opinions about it when it came in. The problem now is it does not go to a quarter of enough of places. That is the way forward. We will have to see something like that. If there is a growth in population like we are after having - our population has nearly doubled in Portlaoise - something has to be put in so people can move from A to B. No longer can you go in cars because it takes an hour to cross the town. From that point of view, if the Department is looking for more money, show us the results at the end of the day. I always acknowledge the work that has been done. We have a good train service out of Portlaoise in the morning and home in the evening provided your job will allow you to get that train. I said already it is important there is joined-up thinking. It could be a lot better for everybody if we put that money to use.

I thank the Deputy. We are doing what he asked us to do. The example is the whole new town service in Portlaoise, the piece around Local Link. Public service obligation services are subject to detailed contracts with what we call key performance indicators to ensure value for money. Penalties are imposed. Demand is high and increasing. Under the Connecting Ireland rural mobility plan, we are looking at delivering for people, with over 70% of those living outside of cities having access-----

Is there any money for the Portlaoise northern orbital route? Yes or no?

The answer is I have not got that detail to hand but I will come back to the Deputy on that.

We will do a second round of five minutes each. I call Deputy Michael Collins.

I have been talking to Councillor Chris Maxwell in west Mayo. There is a serious issue there in relation to the National Transport Authority. It suspended part of the bus service through Westport, Louisburgh, Killeen and Killadoon. A request from local representatives to reinstate the Killeen to Killadoon section has been refused. This decision has left residents isolated with no viable alternative for essential travel. I ask the Minister of State to acknowledge this reality. These communities are being neglected. People are forced to rely on private cars for every journey whether getting to work, school, medical appointments or simply accessing basic services. This is not just a social issue, it is a climate issue. Road transport accounts for 11.8 MtCO2eq annually and 21.5% of our national emissions are from private cars, which dominate energy use in transport. I would appreciate if the Minister of State would look at why this service was suspended. It is not easy for rural communities like this one in Mayo to have the service suspended. Councillor Chris Maxwell asked me to raise that issue at the first opportunity for the people of his area and his fellow public representatives. Will the Minister of State comment?

I do not have that information because it has just been raised. I am happy to take that information from the Deputy and engage with the NTA on his behalf. I am not familiar with it so I would not even attempt to give him an answer. I will go back to the NTA about it.

I would appreciate that. In fairness, I only got it yesterday evening and I would appreciate if the Minister of State did that. I know there is a lot of money which the Minister of State spoke about earlier and there is the positive roll-out of public transport, which I noted earlier. I know he is probably not connected to this but I will turn to the roads budget. It is not his area but transport is transport and a road is a road, whether a car is being used or a tractor.

The situation we find ourselves in in west Cork is that since the bypass for Skibbereen, which could be 30 years ago - though I could be wrong - there has not been a brown cent spent other than on pothole repair. There has not been a passing bay. With the northern relief road in Bandon, there is a couple of quid to draw up another fancy report which will probably be a nice few quid for someone along the line but my brother, Councillor John Collins, asked the other day at one of the those public meetings when there will be a bucket on the ground. People want buckets on the ground. They want their bypasses put in place. They could not tell him, so that is not going to happen. With the southern and northern relief roads for Bandon, Clonakilty relief road, Bantry relief road there is nothing other than reports and kicking the can down the road.

There are no passing bays either. The Minister of State told me he would come down to west Cork and I certainly will invite him at the appropriate time. However, if he comes down, especially during the summer, he could be caught from Bandon to Clonakilty behind a tractor. That is an astonishing situation to find yourself in as a motorist. I would love to tell the Minister of State to use the train but that is not there, so we have to use what is available to us. My point is simple: passing bays have not even been considered. I am not sure whether it comes under the Minister of State's brief but if it does not I would appreciate it if he could go cap in hand - because no disrespect to him but I thought it was the Minister who was going to be here and it does come under the Minister's brief - and fight for the people of west Cork. He is a Corkman and he will certainly come down to west Cork and he understands what I am saying. I am not making it up. It is not just something I have come up with off the top of my head. I am at it every day of the week. I am at it since I came into politics into 2014 at local level. Simple passing bays would be an almighty start, but nobody is willing to invest. There is no future thinking. It is just that is the way it was 25 years ago and 30 years ago, so drive on. There is more traffic on the road and we need simple passing bays on our bypasses to be got to the point where we can say in five years' time there is a bucket on the ground and it is going to happen, rather than in 25 years.

I thank the Deputy. On the roads he refers to and requires, we are seeing an increase in funding for our road network over the next five years. It is true that the Government funds but it is also about working with the local authority and its members to ensure, whether it is the N71 or the different relief roads the Deputy is talking about, that the works take place. Certainly the volume of traffic in west Cork has increased. I am very familiar with the places the Deputy referred to. I am there quite a lot. The whole piece around safety is one we need to look at and I have spoken to the relevant authorities about that already because it is a source of concern. The Deputy made reference to tractors being stuck behind cars. He is right to because people are taking chances in some cases. I will talk to the officials in our Department about the issues he has raised. I am sure he has spoken to Cork County Council about the roads he has mentioned here. It is fair to say though we have seen funding in some of the projects the Deputy referenced. The town of Bandon in particular has benefited from some of the works we have done. One of the big difficulties is that-----

If the Minister of State could wind up there, please.

-----Innishannon piece, where there is gridlock in that town the whole time. Its bottleneck is causing the-----

I forgot to say Innishannon.

We will go on to Deputy Daly.

I thank the Minister of State for answering all the questions in a direct way. I was listening, by the way, to words like "deprioritised" and "discommoded" for certain areas of County Dublin but try living in County Kerry, where the last train leaves at 7 p.m. I thought I would make that point. If you are here you cannot even have your dinner in the evening and catch a train afterwards, hardly.

I have not been able to get an answer from the NTA about the cost of the production and delivery of Leap cards for five- to eight-year-olds. I think it is called the card personalisation service. We submitted a parliamentary question to the NTA for an answer on how much has been spent on these Leap cards, because they are not working at the moment. There are problems with them. I understand the process is ongoing but does the Minister of State have any figures for how much has been spent on these cards, which have not been fully implemented to date?

I have not got that information to hand but I will certainly have the officials and the NTA liaise directly with the Deputy. As he will appreciate, I have not got that here this morning. I will certainly get it for him.

Okay. The NTA said in the reply it felt it would not be appropriate to give a breakdown of capital and current costs at this time.

Just to help clarify it for me, this is the cost of the physical manufacture of the card.

The production and delivery of the Leap cards for five- to eight-year-olds.

Okay. I do not have that information to hand but I will ask that it be communicated to him.

I thank Deputy Daly.

I have two quick questions. On the transfer to the MetroLink project from the TII funds, I want to get an understanding. There is the Cork Luas, the Poolbeg Luas and the Lucan Luas, all of which are still in the planning and design phase. Were they considered for the transfer of that fund, that €71 million, or is the Minister of State happy they are fully budgeted for and fully costed? Is the cost, planning and design for those projects fully incorporated in the coming year's budget?

The answer is there is no issue with funding for those projects for this year.

Okay, and for next year as well.

I am sorry, I meant next year.

Perfect. In response to Deputy Currie on network expansion, the Minister of State mentioned the F spine was the driver of the cost of network expansion. It comes to a similar thing I was getting at with the fare case. Is that not factored into account so when a new phase of BusConnects is being rolled out it is factored in at the start of the year? That would not be something you would expect would be driving the requests for a Supplementary Estimate at the end of the year.

It speaks to the fact the allocation itself was not sufficient.

How are we planning for the next phase of BusConnects so the allocation will be sufficient?

What we are doing and what we need to do, with the OECD coming in as I said, is to look at the whole model and see what we can do in the future. We are committed to the rolling out of different phases of BusConnects. It is about that redesigned network and about ensuring with the NTA that we have the measurable aspects the Leas-Chathaoirleach speaks about so we can ensure we have a public transport system that will not necessarily have incremental supplementaries the whole time. However, it is about, as I said earlier, public service and the PSO.

For sure. I am not disputing that at all. What I am trying to get to is on the planning. For example, we know there are issues with the F spine roll-out. There will probably be significant revision of one of the routes as part of that. That is the sort of thing I would expect a Supplementary Estimates to be called into account for. That does not strike me as the reason driving the Supplementary Estimate in this case and that is what I wanted to get to the bottom of.

In reference to the OECD, my understanding was it was coming in to review the fare structure as opposed to the budgeting or planning process for public transport.

We have an underfunding of PSO in recent years and that is where we are at today. That goes back to my point earlier that the structural piece needs to be looked at in terms of how we can continue to have that sustainable model of delivery, but public transport is not going to be making money, as the Leas-Chathaoirleach knows.

Then it falls to there being a general issue with the PSO as opposed to network expansion, because the network expansion is something we can plan for and we know what is going to happen. Are we saying that is related to the pressure that is coming on the PSO as well or is that a separate point?

It is related. What we are looking at doing is ensuring we get that balance between the PSO payment, the increased passenger payment, the increased passenger numbers and the fare initiatives. Deputy Daly spoke about the Leap card and there is that move from cash to Leap payment. Then there is maintaining the PSO level of provision along with the fare initiatives. I make the point again we have seen passenger numbers increase. The volume is there. If you take the question of the roll-out of the new BusConnects you will have an increase in service provision which is a good news story.

For sure. Again, I am not criticising that, I am just learning about the planning process for this wide network. We will return to that again. The other point I wanted to clarify is the OECD is coming to look at the fare structure.

Yes.

Okay, thanks.

The OECD will do a number of things.

The first thing it will do will be to review how we fund public transport, and then it will build on the work we have already done at a macro level and apply it to Ireland. It is important that we have that review. It is an essential part of what we should be at in terms of looking at the data, but also looking at the model of delivery so we can continue to provide a public transport network.

My six-year-old got his free Leap card a few months ago. It is great and fantastic. Do we have or are we planning to do any research on how that drives the adult companions of those five- to eight-year-olds to use public transport or if there is a kind of coattail effect to bring them on to public transport as well?

As somebody who is a big believer in data, that is a very good question. It is something at which we should look. It is certainly something that would actually be of benefit. Arising from this morning, I will ask the officials in our Department to take that on board because it is a very good question.

For sure. I thank the Minister of State very much. We will go to Deputy O'Gorman next.

One of the most striking things from the "Prime Time" programme earlier this week about the M50 was Transport Infrastructure Ireland basically accepting that it could not fix the congestion problems on the M50. The M50 has grown to capacity and there is literally no room to expand its capacity right now. For me, that certainly makes the case for Dublin. I recognise other Deputies have spoken about the challenges they face in other parts of Ireland but as a Dublin TD, I just want to speak about Dublin for a moment. For Dublin, our solution has to be public transport based. That is why I was so disappointed in the transport plan last week to see that move away from a 2:1 spend on public transport versus roads back to a 1:1 spend because it fundamentally fails to acknowledge that for Dublin and large parts of our country, it is the investment in public transport that is going to get us out of the congestion mess we are in at the moment. I would argue that the consequence of that change is related to the points I made earlier. There is not the money to build Finglas Luas in the next five-year period. There is not the money to build DART+ South West in the next five-year period. That is why they are being bounced into the 2030 to 2050 period. It is because that decision was made. We have a certain amount of cake in the public transport budget and rather than going two thirds to one third on public transport to roads, we are reducing it by a quarter, and that means fewer public transport projects can ultimately be delivered. Therefore, I would just like an understanding in terms of the Department's perspective. How is it going to ultimately deliver the solution for commuters in Dublin city and all the surrounding commuter counties who are going in and out of Dublin every day if it is deliberately choosing to deprioritise investment in public transport?

I would make the point that we are not deprioritising public transport. The very fact that we are-----

With respect, when the Government spends less on something, I would argue that it is deprioritising public transport.

If the Deputy lets me finish, I am going to make the point and I am not going to have an argument because we share a common goal in terms of the Department and we in government getting people onto public transport. Under the previous Government, there was a commitment in relation to the 2:1 ratio in favour of new public transport infrastructure over new roads. The point I would make to the Deputy is the fact that this NDP has a funding ratio of at least 2:1 in favour of new public transport over new roads. That is a fact. That has not changed. That is a reality. What we need to continue to do is ensure that we deliver on our transport commitments. As I said earlier, we are ambitious around public transport. It has worked and it is working, notwithstanding the challenges we do have and that are experienced by people. However, the provision of public transport services is a commitment of the Government. We have seen it across the country. I disagree with the Deputy in terms of the interpretation he has of the plan. The M50 piece last night on "Prime Time" illustrated the importance of getting BusConnects and delivering on our various rail projects. I am going to dovetail into other parts of the country here, particularly Cork, and Deputy O'Hara mentioned Galway. We need to make sure people are not stuck in traffic and that they have better public transport. That is for the Government to address in this regard.

When the Taoiseach was asked about the new transport plan, he said that the 2:1 ratio of public transport to roads was unworkable. I am a little bit puzzled to hear the Minister of State arguing that the 2:1 ratio is still there when the political message going out across the Government is that 2:1 is not there. When I did the sums on what was published last week, I cannot see 2:1 being there either. The Minister of State's comments on that would be helpful.

The point I would make to the Deputy is that new roads in the NDP are €3.3 billion. Over the next five years of the plan, new public transport is at least €6 billion. That is the proof of it. I cannot argue any more than that, a Chathaoirligh.

Okay.

The entire roads budget is €3.3 billion, is that correct?

New roads amount to €3.3 billion.

What is the entire roads budget?

I do not have that in front of me here now, but I will get it for the Deputy.

When we look at that, though, that brings it a lot closer to 1:1, does it not?

It is still 2:1 in terms of the whole. I will make the point again that under the previous Government, there was a commitment in relation to a 2:1 ratio in favour of new public transport infrastructure. It is new public transport over new roads. That is where we are at. If the Deputy wants to argue semantics, it is over new public transport and new roads and that is what we are at. We have not changed from that.

Okay. I will move on. I call Deputy O'Hara.

In terms of the allocation for TII, we had a meeting in here recently on the topic of greenways and the impact they were having on rural communities and rural landowners. There is a code of practice for the process around that, but we heard testimony from many landowners regarding issues in that process and about how the process was not being followed properly in many instances. The big issue is the threat of compulsory purchase order, CPO, whereby many landowners were being threatened with CPO, particularly at a very early stage in the process, which is not the correct way that should be carried out. I would like to hear the Minister of State and Department's views on the CPOs and whether he will be pursuing any changes to the process or at least ensuring the process is being followed correctly by TII.

First of all, the greenways are important. We have seen the success of them in many parts of the country. What we should not have is what we saw last week outside the Dáil with people from Mayo. Was it Mayo the Deputy referenced?

It is right across the State.

We have it in my own constituency with the Cork to Kinsale greenway. There has in a sense been a complete trampling of people's rights, in my opinion, where there has been no proper engagement and no meaningful consultation. That has led to people becoming very angry and upset. It certainly does not enhance the whole concept of the delivery of the greenways because they are of immense benefit across our country.

The code will be reviewed next year. However, I would make the point to the Deputy that in the context of some of the projects he raised, there needs to be proper engagement. There needs to be proper discussion with landowners, homeowners and residents. I will make the point very genuinely as somebody who thinks the greenways are a benefit to our communities that something is fundamentally wrong when people who never protest or never get involved in a dispute are exercised beyond belief. That is not good enough. I certainly believe there needs to be a better and more meaningful engagement with the people in question. TII-----

I agree with the Minister of State's comments on that, but-----

If I could just finish this point, TII has a duty and responsibility in terms of engagement to do so meaningfully with people and I do not think it is doing that at the moment.

Are there any specific actions the Department is proposing to take to ensure that happens? Does the Minister of State believe the CPOs should be taken off the table?

First of all, the code will be reviewed next year. That is the first step. Second, there needs to be proper meaningful engagement between the council, TII and the different entities involved. I do not think there should be a stick like a CPO hanging over people's heads. I will make the point again that the Cork to Kinsale greenway has brought people to the point of being completely disenfranchised at one level and, in my opinion, completely upset by poor engagement.

That can be avoided.

My time is getting quite short so I will move on. Rail has been mentioned at this committee a lot of times. We have capacity issues on rail services across the State, particularly in my constituency with rail services in and out of Galway. There are huge capacity issues on many of the peak services. Some of them have only two carriages, for example the 7.49 a.m. service each morning from Limerick via Athenry to Galway. The issue is that we have new carriages coming on the DART line that will allow the older diesel carriages to go to the regional routes, but we are talking about 2027 before that is scheduled to happen. People in my constituency who are being left behind on the platform and crowded and jammed into unsafe carriages cannot wait for two years or more for those improvements and additional capacity on these services. Is that something the Department is looking at and engaging with Irish Rail on? Is there any way to accelerate that process to get new carriages in place quicker?

First, we are engaging. We have the national strategic rail plan for Ireland. Second, we are upgrading the fleet and the answer is that there are limited options in the short term until we see the new fleet arrive.

Why is that?

It is a work in progress. It is about ensuring we provide a service to people, which we are doing. We have seen an increase in service provision. Undoubtedly, and Deputy Currie mentioned it earlier, we have seen an increase in the volume of people across the country using public transport. For me, the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, and the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, who is responsible for rail, it is about ensuring we get people onto rail. It is about engaging with the relevant stakeholders to ensure we have a delivery of service. It is also about ensuring that in doing all of that, we provide a service that is reliable and gets people to their point of destination in a safe way. We have seen an increase in the provision of rail in the past number of years.

With all of the focus by the former Minister on public transport, why underfund the PSO contracts when the PSO contracts run our essential public transport services like Dublin Bus and Irish Rail in our communities?

Will the Deputy say that again because I lost her in the middle of that?

With all of the focus on public transport by the former Minister, why would there have been a decision to underfund the PSO contracts?

The PSO programme is funded by the Exchequer through the PSO grant. As a Government, under the PSO programme we have taken a number of decisions with regard to fare reductions. We have seen costs increase. I am not sure that I agree with the Deputy that it is-----

The Minister of State stated earlier that there was an underfunding of PSO. I am just building on that and trying to understand it.

I do not think it was deliberate.

It was not a deliberate decision.

No, decisions are about services, seeing an increase in the costs and obviously allocations did not meet that. If the Deputy looks at it in the round, what we have done through the fare initiatives, the reduction of fees, cost-of-living measures, the young adult card and so on is enhance the offering. Costs have gone up and that is not a new phenomenon. I make the point again that public service transport is not a money maker and in my opinion should not be seen as that. What we have seen is an increase in passenger numbers-----

Which is a good thing.

-----but lower average fares. Notwithstanding Deputy Boland's point about her area, the fare initiatives are encouraging people to become regular users of public transport.

There was a deliberate decision though to prioritise new routes over enhancing or sustaining existing services. That is obvious. I turn to the NDP sectoral plan announced last week and to DART+ West. We are through planning, there are no legal issues and it is included in the sectoral plan to start construction in 2027. There is an indicative figure of €1 billion. Is that just for the start of the construction? Will more funding have to be allocated at a later stage? Will the project be broken down into different phases? Does it have to go through any further public spending gates or is that it?

In the context of any project there will be that transparency piece and the different gates that have to be navigated to ensure the project is transparent. The Department will engage with the relevant stakeholders. In the context of the timeline today, with the publication of the accelerated infrastructure plan it is about ensuring we deliver projects quicker, on time and on budget. The actual project costs will vary. In the context of the €1 billion, it is the standard Department of public expenditure cost band. That is what it is allocated under. It is not the actual specific project cost. The short answer to the Deputy is that yes, it will require further approvals, because if it did not the Deputy would come in here on a different day with a different set of questions. That is part of what we do. The question perhaps is if we should take the accelerated infrastructure plan and use that for some of the projects the Deputy spoke about there.

We have to look at the hurdles involved in progressing essential State infrastructure. The NDP sectoral plan allocates €1 billion plus to DART+ West. I do not want to be sitting here in a year's time in front of the NTA saying it has to wait for another allocation to start the next phase, especially with MetroLink and the problems that have to be overcome legally with that. We need to push on and reduce the number of gates and stages to try to construct this piece of infrastructure as soon as possible.

I agree with the Deputy. We need to do things better and faster. DART+ West will need to go to tender and then for further approval to have the contract signed.

I understand that piece.

What we all share is the need to accelerate delivery on behalf of people. I was in Qatar recently and they were building infrastructure projects much faster than here. That poses the question of why and what we can do differently. That fundamental question needs to be addressed by us, as a State. That will have an implication for people at local level perhaps but what serves the greater good?

Let us push on.

What influence does the Minister of State have in talking to Irish Rail as regards trains going through Portlaoise on to Ballybrophy that can take students to Thurles and places like that? Is there any joined-up thinking because I have loads of students who would love to go on the train? Their parents would love to have them on the train. As the Minister of State knows, even secondary schools are having a problem now because there are students driving to school.

In my day, going to school, no one had a car. I remember one young lad coming in a tractor, but that was all. It was not me. Could there be more joined-up thinking from that point of view to get the best possible results from our time on the tracks?

The railway track is the most truesome infrastructure that we have in this country. It is not that long since somebody, somewhere, decided to take up tracks. I would love to know what the thinking behind closing down railways was. I will leave that aside, because it is not a history lesson here. I would love to see more openings for carriages on trains and more stopping of trains at particular times. Even in the school terms, if there was a change, that would allow students to be brought from A to B. That would be great.

In the national development plan, in this famous envelope, the Portlaoise northern orbital route is not contained in the first round that was opened the other day. Who actually says what is to be done? Who actually says we are going to put a road here and not put a road there? If you take the town I represent now, it has north of 30,000 people in it. You see other places that have half of that population getting something. I want to know who that group of people are. I would love to sit down with them and ask them to tell me why we did not tick boxes. I would love to know that, because as the Minister of State knows, all our traffic is coming through Portlaoise and all going to the west of Ireland. It has nowhere else to go. It cannot hide. We are going down by schools and everything like that. I cannot understand, in my head, why the Portlaoise northern orbital route is not up at the top. I would like the people sitting there to tell me why they are not doing it.

I will ask the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, who has responsibility for rail, to engage with the Deputy, but also to speak to the new chief executive of Irish Rail about the matter the Deputy raised. On the NDP envelope regarding the roads, the short answer is that the local authority, as the Deputy knows as a long-time public representative, is the statutory roads authority. It makes requests. It prioritises-----

That is the way it used to be anyway.

I know but that is the answer.

That was all part of it 40 years ago.

I know well.

We have been looking for this for 25 years. All our stuff is up here, but somebody made a decision. Who made the decision not to put roads in? Who makes that decision?

The answer is that a collective of a number of different entities make the decision but I go back to my fundamental point that the local authority, as the statutory roads authority, is the driver of projects locally.

I am talking about the money. Do not come and say that to me, please.

We are well over time.

Who gives the money? I asked a simple question, to be fair. All I asked was who recommends the investment for roads in different areas.

My answer remains the same. As the Deputy knows quite well, local authorities prioritise projects and they recommend to the Department and TII-----

Who makes the decision then?

It is a collective decision then.

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for attending and engaging with the committee.