Debate contribution: All-island Rail Fares

Debate contribution by Mrs Deborah Erskine on 3 December 2024.

MLA

Mrs Deborah Erskine

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

3 December 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

All-island Rail Fares

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4690945

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is important that any modern, forward-thinking society have infrastructure projects that will aid the betterment of its people, socially and economically. Setting our sights high for infrastructure capital investment should be at the forefront of all our minds. No matter how ambitious the plan, however, we must ensure that we think first about our own jurisdiction and how a plan impacts on each and every citizen who lives and works in Northern Ireland. In these days of budgetary constraint, any plan must be fair and proportionate in order to balance the books. The DUP seeks to amend the motion to ensure that we promote the needs of Northern Ireland's rail infrastructure and boost the opportunities that should exist for Northern Ireland plc. That is why our party has focused on the rail feasibility studies that are funded by the Union connectivity review. The plans consist of:

"the electrification of the railway from Belfast to the border, the reopening of the Antrim to Lisburn railway line, with an additional stop at Belfast International Airport, the reinstatement of the Portadown to Armagh route, and a new line between Portadown and Londonderry".

All those plans are important for creating a better public transport offering in those parts of Northern Ireland. I know that the SDLP likes to shout about being the proponent of the all-island rail review, but its motion does not recognise the review's failure to ensure that each and every county of Northern Ireland will have train track considered for it. To me, the real lack of ambition from the Department for Infrastructure does not necessarily pertain to fares but, in fact, to stepping out and building infrastructure in rural areas. Not including Fermanagh in the all-island rail review has led to significant regional imbalances and will create inequality. For a border constituency such as mine, Fermanagh and South Tyrone, not having ambitious plans for bus and rail expansion and development has, essentially, cut us off. There must be better service planning in the here and now and for the future. At a recent meeting of the Infrastructure Committee, officials briefed us on the all-island strategic rail review. It will not surprise Members that Fermanagh was high on my agenda. Whilst mention was made of the Fermanagh and Omagh transport plan as a means to understand the transport needs of people in County Fermanagh, that plan is being developed up to 2035. I have read the document. I did not see rail wholly mentioned in that document. Furthermore, the timescales do not fit in with the 10-year review of rail for the area, as mentioned in the strategic rail review. Surely, we need to look at the inclusion of rail in transport development plans now for its inclusion ahead of the 10-year review. I was then horrified that officials deemed a transport hub offering in Omagh to be an acceptable alternative to developments in County Fermanagh itself. I am not great at geography, but I know that Omagh is in Tyrone, not Fermanagh. Fermanagh should not be disregarded. It is an integral part of the economy and has a wonderful tourism offering. A sustainable and reliable transport offering is needed for my area. Whilst the motion refers to the all-island strategic rail review, for which some money is coming from the Shared Island unit, it is important to recognise the Union connectivity review. It overlap the all-island strategic rail review on the development of rail, but it has also provided the funds for the necessary feasibility work. That work was funded via the UK Government's Union connectivity development fund. Funding is the component to drive forward any rail or transport expansion here. We must be realistic about that. Businesses' investment and profit also drive that agenda. That is why I recognise the need for an aligned fare structure to ensure that the people of Northern Ireland have a fair and accessible transport network offering. We must ensure that fares are reasonable in our own jurisdiction to create that greater economic growth, ensure that barriers to movement are removed and promote regional development between jurisdictions. It is important to note that Translink and Irish Rail are funded in different ways. Translink last increased Enterprise fares in March 2023. They had not been increased for five years prior to that revision. Irish Rail has been able to reduce its standard and online fares by 20% in recent years due to funding that has been provided by the Department of Transport. My party does not support the aspiration of a unified approach to cross-border rail services, not least because Irish Rail and Translink are constituted differently and it would require a harmonised approach to subsidies going forward. Any solution must, ultimately, respect the legal and political status of each jurisdiction as well as the bespoke funding arrangements for each operator. That does not, however, mean that we should not strive for greater alignment in fare structures within those parameters. Practical cooperation is possible and should be pursued. It is misguided, therefore, for the motion to propose to pitch alignment of fares in the context of economic integration. Recently, Translink introduced a new online fare structure for the Enterprise service that is more closely aligned to the Irish Rail web fare. Translink has been operating in a challenging situation with an increasing cost base. There can be no question that the underfunding of public services in Northern Ireland has created disparities. Subsidies are likely to be required to meet the shortfall between the cost of running a rail service and rail revenues. That requires effective funding over a longer period than is currently the case with single-year budgets and an ad hoc in-year payment. The all-island strategic rail review and the Union connectivity review present a clear vision for better connectivity throughout the British Isles. Full delivery of those commitments stands to unlock opportunities for economic growth and job creation in our communities. We will work constructively with the Executive and the UK and Irish Governments to that end and to progress the four feasibility studies that are under way. Hopefully, we will see more on rail and transport development across Northern Ireland. It is crucial that we now see the impetus moving away from the ideas phase and aspirations to delivery. The elephant in the room is, of course, funding. As an integral part of any implementation plan, timescales need to be firmed up and underpinned by a clearly agreed understanding of available Executive allocations. Therefore, I commend the amendment to the House.

1,095 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:42 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification