Sir, - I have been cited by your Environmental Correspondent, Frank McDonald, as one of the principal supporters of the Integrated Proposal for Dublin's light rail system (which would mean a version of the LUAS travelling underground in the city centre). I am very happy to accept this accolade and am pleased to have played a part in having the idea discussed, through arranging a major debate on the issue in Seanad Eireann on February 14th, 1996.
As a consequence of the debate in the Senate the Minister gave certain undertakings, some of which have already been met. However, the requirement for an independent review of the various options, including an unbiased examination of the underground option, could not be said to have been fulfilled as yet.
I understand that a report of sorts has been generated by the international consultants, Semaly. I do not desire to impugn their professional standards; however, since they are the consultants retained and paid by LUAS/ CIE it is highly unlikely that a sceptical public would be convinced of their impartiality in judging between their own scheme and one which their employers are committed to fighting tooth and nail.
During the debate, a number of issues were raised to which no convincing answer has ever been provided. First of all, there is the complete inadequacy of the LUAS, as envisaged, to shift the number of passengers required. Anyone who doubts this should refer to the excellent, closely argued series of articles by Dr Garret FitzGerald in your newspaper some weeks ago.
Secondly, there is the question of the negative impact on employment, environment and safety, already experienced in cities such as Strasbourg and Sheffield. There an on street, light rail system has been at tempted with what one can only charitably describe as "mixed results". Thirdly, there is the massive disruption caused during the excavation and laying of the track for LUAS.
Fourthly, there is the irrefutable evidence that disastrous as this disruption would be, it would be nothing compared to the catastrophic chaos in traffic terms that will ensue once the system is up and running. (Some at least of the proponents of LUAS are honest enough to admit that this is part of the purpose of the system, i.e. to use the ensuing traffic mayhem in an attempt to force motorists out of the city. Here I have to say that to use one of the forces of a city's life as a weapon against its citizenry is both cynical, and likely to backfire.)
Fifthly, one of the great pleasures afforded to those of us who live and work in the inner city, by the vision of Dublin Corporation and its officials, is the ability to walk down a pleasant, tree lined boulevard in the middle of O'Connell Street. Under the LUAS scheme, this may all go. The trees may be uprooted, the flower filled planters removed and replaced by an ugly network of cables and tramlines along which will whizz an endless, snake like procession of vehicles crammed to capacity with standing room only, its LUAS supporters assure us. This will certainly be necessary in order to meet even the minimum passenger targets.
It is time that these real issues were discussed in an atmosphere of honest realism, undistorted by the expensive PR tactics adopted so far by the proponents of LUAS. - Yours, etc.,
Seanad Eireann,
Baile Atha Cliath 2.
