International Risk Management Services, the British-based consultancy which carried out a controversial review of Irish rail safety, has denied it came under pressure to water down its conclusions.
Mr Anthony Pickett, the company's director, said: "There was no request and no pressure to change the report. We stand by it and would refute any claims that the report was doctored."
He said the Department of Public Enterprise had made revisions to the final, summary report but "it was consistent with our original and modified with our approval".
The report, commissioned following the 1997 train derailment at Knockcrockery, Co Roscommon, was highly critical of safety provisions in Iarnrod Eireann. It identified a number of sections where risks were greater due to outdated signalling, poor tracks and other problems. It concluded, however, "there are no line sections where passenger risk levels exceeded the intolerable risk benchmark".
This contrasted with the findings of an IRMS draft report dated October 1998, and obtained recently by Fine Gael under the Freedom of Information Act. Using a different risk assessment formula, the draft report found there were three line sections which posed risks to passengers which were "above the intolerable limit. These risks are unacceptable and require urgent attention."
The draft report named the three routes which "pose unacceptable risks to regular passengers" as Limerick Junction-Waterford, Athlone-Claremorris and Mallow-Tralee.
In addition, it said combined risks to Iarnrod Eireann staff "from train and occupational accidents are above the upper limit of tolerability and require urgent attention".
Mr Pickett denied the risk assessment system was changed to produce more favourable conclusions. "There is nothing ulterior or secret in it," he said, adding the draft report was an "unpublished, early draft document subject to internal checking and the natural process of consultation".
He pointed out that while the risks associated with the three named rail sections had been reduced in the final report, they had been increased for other sections. "Risk levels were revised upwards for some other lines, a fact which has been conveniently ignored by those who think the report was doctored."
Among the other documents obtained by Fine Gael was an urgent fax sent by IRMS to Iarnrod Eireann the day after it had presented its draft report to Department of Public Enterprise officials at a meeting in Manchester. IRMS asked for urgent clarification of some base data on passenger flows, train timetabling and train speeds.
The fax specifically referred to the Mallow-Tralee line, asking for confirmation of the number of trains in each direction. Train loading figures would be reduced, it said, if the number was 11 or 12, rather than four.
According to Fine Gael, this fax suggests there was an urgent redrafting of the report to soften its impact. When the report was published less than a month later, a different risk model had been adopted, producing less critical results.
However, Mr Pickett said the fax was merely for clarification and Iarnrod Eireann was never provided with information which would enable it to revise risk assessment figures downwards.
"We worked closely with the Department but we were independent from them and Irish Rail."
He confirmed IRMS had applied for the contract to oversee the implementation of the safety report, adding "it is expected we will have some involvement".
Iarnrod Eireann would not comment on the controversy yesterday other than saying it co-operated with IRMS and "accepted and welcomed the findings of the report".
It added in a statement: "Iarnrod Eireann would not operate any service if it felt it were unsafe to do so, and the company manages the maintenance of its infrastructure, both new and old, in a professional manner, as shown by its record."
