Joint Committee on Transport - Presentation by the Dargan Project - 13th December 2006

Joint Committee on Transport - Presentation by The Dargan Project - 13th December 2006
Senator Norris: I apologise to the committee and to Mr. Rabbitt in particular, that I was not here for the beginning of the meeting. I was scheduled to speak in the Seanad, which I had to do, and the minute I was finished I came down here.
I come out with my hands up and declare an interest. I have been promoting the idea of an underground railway in Dublin for more than 20 years. In the mid-1990s I saw some of the material reported in the newspapers on Mr. Cormac Rabbitt and his late business partner Rudi Monaghan, the two involved in this early metro project, and I contacted them. As a result of the information they were able to supply, I pushed this matter in the Seanad and got a series of debates on it, and I amended the Dublin transport legislation to make provision for the underground. I was one of those Senators. I was joined subsequently by Senator Quinn and Mr. Rabbitt will confirm that we were the two Senators to whom he referred. On the second time he referred to a Senator getting changes, I am quite happy to come out with my hands up. I am not a bit shy about it. In fact, I am gloriously proud of it.
The committee should accept that there is a difference between Mr. Rabbitt and the RPA. It is quite clear. I heard the head of the RPA on the radio a few years ago speaking about the Luas project. He did not know the length of the project and was not sure of its cost. He stated then that it would cost €3.5 billion and when asked why the cost of the infrastructure was only €1.5 billion and to explain the rest, he replied it was for insurance and contingencies. That is a great deal of money to pay for insurance and contingencies, and I did not find the case convincing at all.
Then Senator Morrissey got right into one of the central questions in that report, which was like a CIA document about rendition containing gaps where one is not let know anything. We were invited to buy a pig in a poke from people who did not seem to even know anything about the nature of the pig.
Mr. Rabbitt has given us figures. In fact, I am not competent to judge them. Unusually, for me, I am prepared to accept my limitations, but I propose that the committee spend a little of its resources in referring these figures to a reputable independent analyst to tell us whether they stand up.
I am also partly responsible for this meeting because I wrote to this committee on 2 November asking for a meeting because some of the least qualified members of this committee were sceptical about Mr. Rabbitt’s qualifications. People who have difficulty walking down a road, let alone designing a railway track, presumed to question his qualifications and it was important that he should appear before the committee. I was also involved with him. The man is very unusual but he is a genius, similar to Mr. Dargan.
Would Mr. Rabbitt be prepared to submit the figures to an independent investigation? This causes concern because one can read a shoal of figures from persons with official titles and positions and think that that commands respect. A number of people appeared before the committee recently to discuss Dublin Port but none of them had turned up at the important conference organised by a member of the committee, even though they had been asked to be key speakers.
Does this proposal take in the entire city? The Luas is disconnected and services amputate portions of the city. Does Mr. Rabbitt’s proposal for an orbital route with spokes mean that the network would be accessible from virtually every section of the city? Information has been provided on costs but over what timescale would the project be likely to be delivered? In addition to the orbital route, is a spur to the airport included?
Senator Morrissey: And beyond.
Senator Norris: As I am parochial, I am not bothered about the use of the word “beyond”. Swords can well look after itself and the line will probably be extended there anyway. Would Mr. Rabbitt’s system make the airport spur accessible for most areas of the city, not only points on the orbital route? In other words, if one was in Drimnagh or Rathfarnham, would one be able to use a spoke?
Mr. Rabbit is cleverly using a significant proportion of an existing network. For example, 54% of the circle line is in place. Presumably, this is demonstrable from the maps but I would like Mr. Rabbitt to confirm in writing that this is the case. The committee should examine recommending that Mr. Rabbitt appear before the Cabinet sub-committee. When we had a meeting a few years ago and I happened to see in the distance Deputy Eoin Ryan, then chairman of this committee, I grabbed him. As a result of that meeting, we arranged for Professor Melis to appear before the committee, which transformed things. It also led to the legislative changes we have made. One can travel ten metres underground without incurring a cost.
I am sorry the meeting is truncated but we should pursue this proposal, even at this late stage. We are being railroaded into a situation where we will buy a pig in a poke. It would be a pity to be betrayed in the enthusiasm for an underground railway to include something that is second best, if a project that would serve the entire city could be implemented for the same or a lower cost. During the period I have campaigned for a metro system, in the footsteps of Mr. Rabbitt who gave me the technical information, The Irish Times has consistently campaigned against it and I do not understand why. I wish I understood because, in addition to campaigning vociferously in favour of the Luas, the newspaper has campaigned strongly against a metro system.
Mr. Rabbitt: I have no problem submitting the figures, as long as there is a purpose to it. What will be the consequences if I submit them? If I am correct, what will be the next step?
With regard to the route, the spurs and connections, the project would be for the entire city. In my jargon, I use the phrases “capital city” and “capital’s traffic” because this is about the nation and Dublin affects the nation. I live in Galway and make many trips to Dublin. How I get around has a major effect on my day-to-day life. How one gets around Dublin is more important than how one gets to it because that determines whether one will drive. If a person is living in Dún Laoighaire and wishes to travel to Phibsboro, using public transport, he or she must take the DART into the city centre and then take a bus. It is very awkward and people usually drive. However, if a connecting circle line was in place, the person concerned would be able to travel from Dún Laoighaire to Phibsboro because there would be connecting rail lines.
The plan would have a significant influence on quality of life. The Atkins report in 1998 recommended a compromise on the airport line. Two lines were under examination to Tallaght and Sandyford and we proposed a third which we called a compromise, but it was additionality. It was recommended that the PPPs should be used on the airport line. The Farrell Grant Sparks report commissioned by the Minister recommended that it be done that way. The difference between my proposal and that of the Government is the Cork-Galway-Limerick line into Heuston Station could go underground at the Phoenix Park, join the circle line, head to Liffey junction at Cabra and on to the airport. This was recommended in 1991 and provided for a mainline rail service to the airport, which would be extended to Swords and connect with the service to Belfast. It could be funded, while goods traffic could be transported to the airport. This proposal is also fully incorporated into my scheme, which would connect the circle line to the airport, Swords and Belfast line.
There are three options - to connect as quickly as possible at Swords; connect at Drogheda; or connect further north at Duleek. The Dublin-Belfast route could be 6 km shorter and would be much faster. European Cohesion Funds would be available to finance this and the line would run along the motorway corridor. There would be many advantages, including increased commuter numbers for Irish Rail, Luas and so on by between 5% and 15% through a fully integrated system. My project has Xs and Os outlining transportation points in the city centre. The O represents the circle line which could use the interconnector and connect with the Belfast line or travel via the airport to the old Belfast line on the same gauge. That highlights accessibility. The connection and options between routes would result in a massive capacity increase. It would fit in with the existing rolling stock. More rolling stock could be bought and used in other areas, as more and more of the system is electrified. There will be lower energy costs when the system is electrified in the future.
I was also asked about the timescale. This system could be started immediately. If I was told to go out the door and make my order, I could have it operating within five years. I could get my money and my sponsors. I could work with the RPA, or under the RPA. It could be done as part of a combined effort. When I say it can be done, some people might be keen to question my credentials. I have done approximately 20 CPOs. I have managed EIS schemes. I have worked in some of the most difficult areas, including Foxrock, White’s Cross and Knocksinna. I have dealt with things that have been on the agenda for up to 15 years. I refer to the widening of the dual carriageway. I went in and I solved it. I did the Dublin Airport to Balbriggan bypass, which was the longest motorway scheme in the country at the time, in two years using new technology. It was the first time it was ever done in a fully integrated way. That was in 1992-93. I did it in two years, from start to inquiry.
I selected the northern cross route. I altered it around Ballymun. I brought that scheme forward. It was supposed to be ten years behind the southern cross route, but it opened five years before that because I did the groundwork for it and put it together as a package. I put it together as a very neat bundle. I pointed out what needed to be done. I could point out some other issues like that. I held it as a three-plus-three motorway, instead of a two-plus-two motorway. I said that a three-plus-three motorway would be needed because I knew that traffic levels would increase. I refused to reduce it. I held it and eventually the people for whom I was working agreed that I was right and that we should proceed in that manner. I thought the same had been done for the southern cross route - I gave them the same information I had - but it was not done. It is costing a fortune to upgrade that section of the road. I refer to the cost of acquiring land and building bridges, for example. The construction of the southern cross route was delayed when they realised they would have to widen the bridges. I have a very strong track record. I have touched the surface of it. I have responded to the questions about my capability and competence.
Senator Norris: Who was Mr. Rabbitt working for?
Mr. Rabbitt: I was working for the local authority. It was my job to do it.
Senator Norris: Yes.
Mr. Rabbitt: I maintained the reservations. I had overall control of non-motorway schemes in Dublin for a long time. I am not sure how many kilometres of such roads I built. I am sure I built 120 km or 140 km of distributor roads with private contractors. I also worked on planning permissions. I worked out in 1988-89 that I had done 85 km of such roads at that stage. I continued with that work for a good while after that. The committee knows about my ability and my experience in Madrid, Hong Kong and Japan. I have been to Barcelona, where an incredible railway tunnel has been completed. The tunnel in question, which is slightly bigger than the Dublin Port tunnel, is totally split in the middle so that there are two separate tunnels, in effect. That was done in line with fire safety precautions, etc. It has massive operating advantages. That is what this is about. It is about customers and how the system is operated. It is not about questions of engineering, like how awkward it is to build certain things. It is about what works. That is what I have taken on board when making my suggestions. Such matters can be taken on board.
I was also asked about the use of the existing network. I mentioned William Dargan. It is no accident that Dargan is the patron of this project. One should look at this proposal in the context of the interconnectivity of the transport systems in Dublin city. It is not just about rail. It links all the bus systems as well. If one examines the website I mentioned earlier, one will see the presentation that was made by the Japanese group that supported me at the Minister’s committee. The maps of Dublin in that presentation show the road and rail systems which were set out by our forefathers. The rail system had five radial lines coming into Dublin. In addition to the four surviving lines - the Belfast, Wexford, Cork-Limerick-Galway and Mullingar-Sligo lines - there was also a fifth line, which was the Harcourt Street line. Those five lines were like the spokes of a wheel. There is a half-loop around those spokes on the north side of the city. I propose to complete that loop on the south side of the city. That is how this project started. It is proposed to develop extra spokes going to the airport and to Templeogue. There are six railway lines at present - four mainline railway lines and two Luas lines. The airport and Templeogue lines would be new.
Our forefathers laid out the roads which are now the national primary and secondary routes. Those roads arrive in Dublin between the railway spokes I mentioned. Seven primary routes and one secondary route come into various parts of Dublin. Some other roads also come into Dublin. One could argue that more than ten roads come into Dublin. We need to consider the eight railway lines, or spokes, that I mentioned - the six existing lines and the two proposed lines - along with the ten existing roads into Dublin which are between those spokes. There could be 18 ways of coming into Dublin, which is a bay city, by road and rail. I find it fascinating that the road network is semi-circumferential on the north and south sides. I refer to roads on the north side like the North Circular Road, Collins Avenue, Griffith Avenue, the M50 and the road that runs parallel to the runways which go around to Blanchardstown, more or less. On the south side, the Kylemore Road, the South Circular Road and Sundrive Road run in a similar pattern. These are big and wide roads. The hub of the wheel is in the city centre, the spokes travel out from that in the manner I have outlined and the roads I have just mentioned operate like the rim around the edge. A very integrated system could be operated using that network. We need to take advantage of that by providing for the system I am proposing. I have highlighted the issue that was raised.