Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

dynamick · 29-03-2011 4:40pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

A few interesting snippets in there, all the same.

From Broughan:

...[€600m annual payment for PPPs]...

I don't recall that figure being mentioned before - does anyone else?

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2010/06/23/00015.asp
(last two paras)

Jack Noble · 29-03-2011 4:48pm

dynamick wrote: »

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2010/06/23/00015.asp
(last two paras)

Thanks. Never saw that before. Don't recall it ever reported in the media. Must pay more attention to Dail debates on Oireachtas website than rely on media to report what is said.

Tech3 · 29-03-2011 5:02pm

I was informed by the former Minister, Noel Dempsey, that if all the Transport 21 road projects, the metro and the interconnector were delivered, repayments would eventually amount to a €600 million tranche each year in the transport capital budget.

Yes in hindsight, sure half the T21 road projects have been postponed and those PPP's that were built were not shadow tolls but we will have to stump up costs for low level AADT than expected hard toll roads such as the Limerick Tunnel and M3. I cant see where a sum of €600 million comes from.

How much is it estimated to costing the state per year to pay back on Metro North if built?

dynamick · 29-03-2011 5:02pm

kildarestreet.com is easier to read than oireachtas.ie

Aard · 29-03-2011 5:02pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

The Greens used €700m as the cost of Metro North in their pre-election, 2011-2014 Budget document.

I don't think the Greens ever said that it'd cost only €700m, even the part of it to be paid during their expected government tenure. That 700 figure, iirc, was something that was read into too deeply by posters here and the media, and was nothing concrete, and definitely not a final-cost sum.

Jack Noble · 29-03-2011 5:17pm

Aard wrote: »

I don't think the Greens ever said that it'd cost only €700m, even the part of it to be paid during their expected government tenure. That 700 figure, iirc, was something that was read into too deeply by posters here and the media, and was nothing concrete, and definitely not a final-cost sum.

The Greens said €700m to complete Metro North in a budget document for 2011-2014 and quoted in the Indo and Times. That figure was not used again and was certainly not used in their manifesto.

monument · 29-03-2011 5:28pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

The Greens said €700m to complete Metro North in a budget document for 2011-2014 and quoted in the Indo and Times. That figure was not used again and was certainly not used in their manifesto.

The €700m may have been an estimate of what the state will / would have paid up front?

DWCommuter · 29-03-2011 5:30pm

Tech3 wrote: »

How much is it estimated to costing the state per year to pay back on Metro North if built?

People tend to mix up the direct construction cost of MN with the total bill for the project. Assuming the direct construction cost that is PPP is around €2 billion (2003 figure) then use that figure to work out the repayments over 30 years. In 2003 the interest calculated was 700 million approx. on top of the 2 billion. I'd say thats higher now.

Below are the figures from the 2003 OBC as quoted by Frank Allen. The RBC took a further 200 million off the 4.8 billion. From where, I don't know.

The 4.8 billion figure was subsequently broken down by the RPA to reveal that the direct construction costs were 1.72 billion, but added to this were risk and insurance costs of 903 million, cost escalation components of 811 million, VAT of 458 million, PPP interest of 676 million and financial and legal costs of 313 million. This brings it to 4.8 billion approx.

The Greens said the state needed to inject another 700 million on top of the PPP repayments. LV now claims its over a billion.

DWCommuter · 29-03-2011 5:35pm

monument wrote: »

What you quoted has always been the case, the green light has always depended on funding.

Many posters -- both pro and anti metro -- have said this, time and time again.

Agreed Monument, but the point Im continuing to make is that some people ignore the dire financial situation in this country and think that we can afford the upfront costs and the repayments on the PPP part of the project. That's the grenade that lurks in Government buildings.

blarney_boy · 29-03-2011 5:41pm

Can we also remember that port tunnel cost 50% more than the initial estimates (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/port-tunnel-cost-euro804m-50pc-more-than-budget-2597012.html), if the current estimates for Metro North are 2 billion, can we assume the final cost will be around 4 billion?

dubhthach · 29-03-2011 6:04pm

Port Tunnel was built before the introduction of fixed price tendering. There was similiar huge overruns on other projects up to that time such as the "South East" part of the M50. However most of the interurbans were on a fixed price, as a result you ended up getting them built on time and generally under-budget.

Jack Noble · 29-03-2011 6:12pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

People tend to mix up the direct construction cost of MN with the total bill for the project. Assuming the direct construction cost that is PPP is around €2 billion (2003 figure) then use that figure to work out the repayments over 30 years. In 2003 the interest calculated was 700 million approx. on top of the 2 billion. I'd say thats higher now.

Below are the figures from the 2003 OBC as quoted by Frank Allen. The RBC took a further 200 million off the 4.8 billion. From where, I don't know.

The 4.8 billion figure was subsequently broken down by the RPA to reveal that the direct construction costs were 1.72 billion, but added to this were risk and insurance costs of 903 million, cost escalation components of 811 million, VAT of 458 million, PPP interest of 676 million and financial and legal costs of 313 million. This brings it to 4.8 billion approx.

The Greens said the state needed to inject another 700 million on top of the PPP repayments. LV now claims its over a billion.

DWC

Isn't the point of the competitive tendering process to reduce all those costs - not just the construction costs? If the construction costs have fallen by circa 30% to 40%, surely the risk and over-run elements will fall by a commensurate amount, of not further? Also the squeeze has been put on legal costs so I cannot see such a massive legal bill forming part of the final contract. Finally, VAT will be a net benefit to the State.

This is the €5bn/€4.8n figure used by Frank McDonald which has led the of-quoted "€5bn Metro North project".

And someone - whether RPA or DoT - leaked figures of €3.7bn falling by one third to a final bill of €2.5bn to the Independent last September.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/metro-cost-falls-by-onethird-2371946.html

THE Metro North light-rail system linking Dublin city centre with the airport and Swords will cost €2.5bn, a third less than expected.
And although the project has yet to be given the green light by government, the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) has spent €175m to date buying land, carrying out pre-construction work and planning the line.
The project was expected to cost €3.7bn but bidders are providing estimates much lower than anticipated, sources said.
This is partly due to an across-the-board reduction in costs and a lack of major projects across the EU at construction stage.
"The cost of metro systems varies between €100m and €200m per kilometre; we expect this to cost about €2.5bn (€138m per kilometre)," one source said.

But you are right about the upfront costs to the State and the interest bill - if private sector funding is available and that is the big unknown at present.

While Metro North is factored into the 2011-2014 four-year plan agreed with the IMF/EU, will it survive - can it survive - lower than expected growth rates and falling tax revenues? That's just as big a question as whether PPP funding is available.

While, I'm a big supporter of Metro North - and Dart Underground - I am realistic enough to accept that Metro cannot go ahead if the fiscal situation deteriorates much more. It's already touch and go as it is.

Empire o de Sun · 29-03-2011 6:27pm

blarney_boy wrote: »

Can we also remember that port tunnel cost 50% more than the initial estimates (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/port-tunnel-cost-euro804m-50pc-more-than-budget-2597012.html), if the current estimates for Metro North are 2 billion, can we assume the final cost will be around 4 billion?

Let's not build anything, the cost will always overrun!!!

etchyed · 29-03-2011 6:29pm

blarney_boy wrote: »

Can we also remember that port tunnel cost 50% more than the initial estimates (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/port-tunnel-cost-euro804m-50pc-more-than-budget-2597012.html), if the current estimates for Metro North are 2 billion, can we assume the final cost will be around 4 billion?

No.

DWCommuter · 29-03-2011 6:33pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

DWC

Isn't the point of the competitive tendering process to reduce all those costs - not just the construction costs? If the construction costs have fallen by circa 30% to 40%, surely the risk and over-run elements will fall by a commensurate amount, of not further? Also the squeeze has been put on legal costs so I cannot see such a massive legal bill forming part of the final contract. Finally, VAT will be a net benefit to the State.

This is the €5bn/€4.8n figure used by Frank McDonald which has led the of-quoted "€5bn Metro North project".

And someone - whether RPA or DoT - leaked figures of €3.7bn falling by one third to a final bill of €2.5bn to the Independent last September.

But you are right about the upfront costs to the State and the interest bill - if private sector funding is available and that is the big unknown at present.

While Metro North is factored into the 2011-2014 four-year plan agreed with the IMF/EU, will it survive - can it survive - lower than expected growth rates and falling tax revenues? That's just as big a question as whether PPP funding is available.

While, I'm a big supporter of Metro North - and Dart Underground - I am realistic enough to accept that Metro cannot go ahead if the fiscal situation deteriorates much more. It's already touch and go as it is.

Yep its how FMD got the 5 billion figure (it was publically available since 2003 anyway.) and its really the only one we've ever had any actual confirmed detail on. Since then its all been shrouded in mystery. I agree the other costs should be falling as well, except the interest rate. However the Government/RPA know the real costs. The direct construction costs of the PPP do not cover everything, so even if a bid was accepted and the consortiums figure was revealed, it would not be the actual cost of MN. Its important that people understand this.

So the problem is twofold. The cost of the PPP and the cost of upfront monies from the state. LV has finally alluded to that and its about time. Personally I think his response is the start of the end. The fiscal situation is extremely bad and its easy for people to think that 100 million (for example) per annum is easy to handle on a PPP project. Combine that with the political attitude to rail projects over road and the net result is pretty much what Ive been saying - MN will not happen Of course I always add that I could be wrong.

It will be an unmitigated disaster if its not pushed forward and will also spell the very end for DU. One final scenario that I wouldn't rule out (but highly unlikely) is the postponement of MN and in an attempt to look like they are prioritising projects, claim DU is to be brought forward. A real buying time exercise, because DU will suffer from the same problems.

Nothing surprises me anymore. We pissed away billions and got very little. Prepare yourselves. Thats all I can say. The signs don't look promising.

Aard · 29-03-2011 6:43pm

blarney_boy wrote: »

Can we also remember that port tunnel cost 50% more than the initial estimates (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/port-tunnel-cost-euro804m-50pc-more-than-budget-2597012.html), if the current estimates for Metro North are 2 billion, can we assume the final cost will be around 4 billion?

...50% more than €2bn is €3bn

Jack Noble · 29-03-2011 6:43pm

DWCommuter wrote: »

Nothing surprises me anymore. We pissed away billions and got very little. Prepare yourselves. Thats all I can say. The signs don't look promising.

TBH, that was my first instinct when I read Varadkar's Dail reply to Broughan.

A second reading gave me a little more hope - but not much. But we'll know soon enough.

lods · 29-03-2011 6:56pm

I would just like a decision rather than all this double speak . I've no doubt FG and LV know what their going to do & all this seems like an illusion of examining the project . As bertie would say, it's all smoke and daggers!

Pete_Cavan · 29-03-2011 9:21pm

dubhthach wrote: »

Port Tunnel was built before the introduction of fixed price tendering. There was similiar huge overruns on other projects up to that time such as the "South East" part of the M50. However most of the interurbans were on a fixed price, as a result you ended up getting them built on time and generally under-budget.

It is true that cost and time over-runs have largely been eliminated since the introduction of fixed price lump sum contacts but MN will not be built under the new Public Works Contracts. Under the PPP, the design and build elements of the contract will limit the governments exposure to risk and put the risk of increasing construction costs onto the winning consortium.

Tech3 · 29-03-2011 9:23pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

Isn't the point of the competitive tendering process to reduce all those costs - not just the construction costs? If the construction costs have fallen by circa 30% to 40%, surely the risk and over-run elements will fall by a commensurate amount, of not further? Also the squeeze has been put on legal costs so I cannot see such a massive legal bill forming part of the final contract. Finally, VAT will be a net benefit to the State.

The figures were given from 2003 so I dont think constuctions costs were that much more between now and then. 05/06 was the peak time of construction costs.

The interest of €600 million - €1 billion on the loan repayment is excessive but I think more importantly how much will be generated in passengers sales per year and revenue generated from the created jobs during constuction. Some may think this is only miniscule compared to the crazy bank debt we have and this is at least improving the countrys infrastructure and getting many people off the dole. For me I'm still undecided whether this should be a priority right now but it sure as hell is better than pouring capital into our toxic banks.

DWCommuter · 29-03-2011 9:56pm

Can anyone clarify the MN PPP model? Apart from design and build I assume the consortium will operate it as well. Do they claw back user revenue on top of the PPP repayments over 30 years?

DWCommuter · 29-03-2011 10:10pm

lods wrote: »

I would just like a decision rather than all this double speak . I've no doubt FG and LV know what their going to do & all this seems like an illusion of examining the project . As bertie would say, it's all smoke and daggers!

We'd all like a decision. But as FG, LAB and LV have only just arrived they are now being treated to the reality of the project. This has to be weighed up against the state of the country's finances. I'd say it will be soon enough. MN is not the voting machine some think it is. People are now worried about keeping the roof over their heads, paying the bills etc etc. Worrying about traffic congestion in Dublin has gone way down the list. That concern was a by product of wealth to many of us. The ultimate decision on MN will be based on whether or not we want to future proof Dublin in terms of public transport provision. But I doubt our politicians have the balls to think that way.

dynamick · 30-03-2011 7:53am

DWCommuter wrote: »

Can anyone clarify the MN PPP model? Apart from design and build I assume the consortium will operate it as well. Do they claw back user revenue on top of the PPP repayments over 30 years?

It's a a DBFM contract so the operation of the metro will be a separate contract.

The hope would be that the operations revenue would cover running costs as with the Luas.

The decision to proceed with projects like MN will surely be taken with the IMF/EU. As the funding arrangements for the state for the next 4 years are currently under negotiation, I'd imagine we'll know in the next few weeks.

Jack Noble · 30-03-2011 8:37am

dynamick wrote: »

It's a a DBFM contract so the operation of the metro will be a separate contract.

The hope would be that the operations revenue would cover running costs as with the Luas.

The decision to proceed with projects like MN will surely be taken with the IMF/EU. As the funding arrangements for the state for the next 4 years are currently under negotiation, I'd imagine we'll know in the next few weeks.

I thought it was a DBFMO contract - the two bidding consortia each contain an operator.

Here's what it says on Transport 21 re the original tender and final selected bidders.

Metro North is a PPP project and bidders will be asked to tender for the design, build, funding, maintenance and operation of the line. In February 2009 four bidding consortia submitted their first round tenders for the PPP contract for Metro North to the RPA. The consortia are a mix of international and Irish companies. These submissions were evaluated by the RPA and in June 2009 the latter announced that it had shortlisted two bidding consortia, Celtic Metro Group and Metro Express, to proceed to the final stage of the PPP procurement process.

Metro Express has Transdev/RATP (Paris Metro) and Celtic Metro has MTR (Hong Kong metro).

Here is what RPA posted on Metro North Facebook page re repayments and operations:

Metro North is being brought forward as a PPP and a large part of the funding will be raised by the private sector. Government does not start to pay this money back until Metro North is open to passengers. The payments to the private sector are also linked to performance of the system with significant deductions made if the service is not provided. This mix of the public and private sectors working hand in hand has proved to be extremely successful in Ireland and other European countries.

Aard · 30-03-2011 8:37am

Fortunately, I think the EU do take kindly to infrastructural investment.

dynamick · 30-03-2011 8:59am

The RPA’s Metro North and West (and potentially Luas
Line F) projects include the provision of rolling stock
as well as maintenance of the entire system including
the control room as part of the DBFM with a separate
Operator responsible for the provision of drivers and
for revenue collection, fare evasion and customer
services

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/project_management_guidelines_for_PPP.pdf

Jack Noble · 30-03-2011 9:17am

dynamick wrote: »

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/project_management_guidelines_for_PPP.pdf

That's interesting because it is contrary to everything that has been said about Metro North operations to date - by both the RPA and Dot/T21.

The original Metro North tender was for DBFMO and that is the basis on which the consortia submitted their bids.

The T21 quote I linked to above is from a page that was last updated in February 2011.

Here is the original RPA press release on the procurement process which may clear up confusion. It appears that while one consortium will be selected for the Metro North project, there will be two separate contracts - 'Infrastructure' and 'Operations'.

http://www.rpa.ie/en/projects/metro_north/build_and_operation_permission/Pages/MetroNorthProcurement.aspx

The project will be carried out on the basis of a design, build, finance and maintain contract (the "Infrastructure Contract") having a term of the construction period plus 25 years from the commencement of passenger services. The project will also include an operations contract (the “Operating Contract”) which will be effective from the commencement of passenger services.

dynamick · 30-03-2011 9:42am

I don't understand that to mean that one consortium will get both contracts.

There is a line to be drawn between operations and maintenance. From the NTA quote above it seems that the ops contract will be limited to :

provision of drivers
revenue collection
fare evasion
customer services

Other day to day tasks in running the trains will be carried out by the main construction contractor.

Jack Noble · 30-03-2011 10:06am

dynamick wrote: »

I don't understand that to mean that one consortium will get both contracts.

There is a line to be drawn between operations and maintenance. From the NTA quote above it seems that the ops contract will be limited to :
provision of drivers

revenue collection

fare evasion

customer services

Other day to day tasks in running the trains will be carried out by the main construction contractor.

Then why do the bidding consortia contain operation companies?

Is it not the case that:

If Celtic Metro win, then MTR will get the 'operations' contract as part of the deal?

If Metro Express win, then Transdev/RATP will be the selected operator?

I've just found the RPA original tender from March 2007 - and now I'm even more confused. It refers to separate contracts.

Here it is

http://www.etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAR079793

Title attributed to the contract by the contracting entity: Metro North
(Dublin) - Infrastructure Contract.
RPA seeks expressions of interest for the provision of a new metro line
serving the Greater Dublin area between Lissenhall and St Stephen's Green
('Metro North').
RPA intends to award separate contracts for:
(i) an infrastructure contractor and rolling stock supplier (the
'infrastructure contract'); and
(ii) an operator (the 'operating contract')
(together the 'Metro North Contracts').
Interested infrastructure contractors are invited to respond to this
notice.
Interested operators are invited to respond to a separate notice
establishing a qualification system for operators.

Strange that DoT refer to a DBFMO contract on T21 but the reality seems to very different, as you have said Dynamick.

dynamick · 30-03-2011 10:18am

btw: Ever seen MTR in operation? It's an amazingly competent company decades ahead of European rail operators.

MTR or RATP will run the control room for MN

lods · 01-04-2011 6:26am

Leo Varadkar just interviewed on RTE , says he's proceeding with Metro North, Enabling workings starting immediately .:mad:

Van.Bosch · 01-04-2011 6:53am

lods wrote: »

Leo Varadkar just interviewed on RTE , says he's proceeding with Metro North, Enabling workings starting immediately .:mad:

April Fool?

Jack Noble · 01-04-2011 7:05am

Van.Bosch wrote: »

April Fool?

Golden rule for today is believe nothing said or printed this morning!:o

lods · 01-04-2011 7:20am

Jack Noble · 01-04-2011 7:38am

lods wrote: »

Twould be very funny all the same, lods, if Leo did announce it this afternoon!

Although I doubt you would laugh quite as much as the rest of us:D

lods · 01-04-2011 7:53am

Jack Noble wrote: »

Twould be very funny all the same, lods, if Leo did announce it this afternoon!

Although I doubt you would laugh quite as much as the rest of us:D

Now that would really be an April fool:P

ei.sdraob · 01-04-2011 10:28am

Hmm jokes aside I do see the need for a metro, I would think that Dublin Airport is a confusing mess if you are the first time in Ireland, as in trying to figure out how you get to city center, especially if you dont know English. Hell as someone who used the ariport many of times i was still stumped by car parking arrangements spending an hour looking for a carpark

In Geneva in comparison you can take a train/metro (mostly underground), tram or buses from airport for free, they even go as far as letting the visitors use the public transport (trams, buses, boats) etc for free
I wonder what it would do to tourism here if we had free transport.

Jack Noble · 01-04-2011 10:41am

Joking aside, this report sounds a very ominous warning for Metro North, Dart Underground and other PPP projects.

It won't matter how committed the governement is to building rail and road schemes if the money to do it is not available.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/bailout-puts-rail-projects-in-jeopardy-2603945.html

THE future of Metro North and other key infrastructure projects has been thrown into doubt because of the fallout from the EU/IMF bailout.
Key roads and rail projects are unlikely to go ahead unless "financial credibility" is restored and the international markets are assured that the State can make repayments, the Department of Transport has warned.
And even if the projects eventually get the green light, they will end up costing taxpayers millions of euro more than planned for.
This is because Ireland will be forced to pay a premium to borrow money on the international markets in the wake of the ongoing banking and economic crisis.
In a 322-page briefing note to new minister Leo Varadkar, which was published last night, officials warn that the markets will be "reluctant" to lend unless the debt crisis is stabilised.
This means that public private partnership contracts -- where the private sector bankrolls a project and the State repays the cost over time -- are at risk of being permanently shelved.

Here's the briefing note given to Varadkar and released by DoT last night.

http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/13086-MINISTERS_BRIEF_SCANNED_VERSION-0.PDF

EDIT: Just checked the document - pretty much every detail on Metro North has been blacked out and there is very little on DartU and nothing new.

FreudianSlippers · 01-04-2011 11:23am

Jack Noble wrote: »

Joking aside, this report sounds a very ominous warning for Metro North, Dart Underground and other PPP projects.

It won't matter how committed the governement is to building rail and road schemes if the money to do it is not available.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/bailout-puts-rail-projects-in-jeopardy-2603945.html

Here's the briefing note given to Varadkar and released by DoT last night.

http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/13086-MINISTERS_BRIEF_SCANNED_VERSION-0.PDF

EDIT: Just checked the document - pretty much every detail on Metro North has been blacked out and there is very little on DartU and nothing new.

The point that I've made on this thread multiple times is that the money has to be available for these projects - beg, borrow or steal.

We are never going to recover economically on our relatively small exports (our only positive growth sector) and by funnelling more money into the banks.

We need to get our internal economy going again. How do we do that?
Simply put, we need to build some serious shít and we need to do it now.
We have a massive number of unemployed people (a lot of whom are builders or in the trade) and construction companies laying people off every day.
We need to tender the works for Metro North, DU and other projects and start on them as soon as physically possible. Fast-track the planning and get moving.

Not having money is no excuse. We are borrowing out the arse to fund our banks, when realistically if we get people back to work building MN and DU et al we will be effectively recapitalising our banks and our country as a whole by getting currency moving. We are facing two distinct choices here. Build or don't build. I don't think you'll find any credible economists that will suggest not building infrastructure now is a good way to begin recovery.

Jack Noble · 01-04-2011 11:35am

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The point that I've made on this thread multiple times is that the money has to be available for these projects - beg, borrow or steal.

We are never going to recover economically on our relatively small exports (our only positive growth sector) and by funnelling more money into the banks.

We need to get our internal economy going again. How do we do that?
Simply put, we need to build some serious shít and we need to do it now.
We have a massive number of unemployed people (a lot of whom are builders or in the trade) and construction companies laying people off every day.
We need to tender the works for Metro North, DU and other projects and start on them as soon as physically possible. Fast-track the planning and get moving.

Not having money is no excuse. We are borrowing out the arse to fund our banks, when realistically if we get people back to work building MN and DU et al we will be effectively recapitalising our banks and our country as a whole by getting currency moving. We are facing two distinct choices here. Build or don't build. I don't think you'll find any credible economists that will suggest not building infrastructure now is a good way to begin recovery.

Agree 100% - but we can't magic the money out of thin air. That's the problem the new government faces thanks to the legacy of the FF-PD/Green years.

FreudianSlippers · 01-04-2011 11:43am

Jack Noble wrote: »

Agree 100% - but we can't magic the money out of thin air. That's the problem the new government faces thanks to the legacy of the FF-PD/Green years.

They certainly can. We're already borrowing billions from Europe and IMF, I'm sure if the current government went forward with a proposal to create jobs via infrastructure construction in Dublin which would link the airport to the city centre, financial district and companies like Google and could show financial support from private enterprise - they would be more than happy to lend more money.

As it stands right now, we can either keep borrowing from them to prop up the banks for the foreseeable future, or we can borrow from them to get our economy moving again which will, in turn, benefit our crippled banks.
This is an inherited problem, but they shouldn't be using the same tired inherited policies... the previous government's decisions were based on bad economics.
It's almost dicta at this point: THERE IS NO SAVING YOUR WAY OUT OF RECESSION

What I think people don't understand is that our banks are failing for multiple reasons, one key one is that there is very little movement of funds at this point. Banks rely on this movement of credit and debit to continue to fund themselves. The only way to properly repair this is to lower unemployment and start paying people who will put that money in banks, buy houses, etc. - the only way (practically) to get people back to work which will not create another property bubble is infrastructure!

OurLadyofKnock · 01-04-2011 12:12pm

Ireland (and many other countries) is being used as a tax farm to save globalisation. We have been reduced to nothing other than tax livestock. That's what is behind the current Voodoo Economics.

The only chance Ireland has to recover it to build massive amounts of new infrastructure. There is no other option. Either we do this or Ireland becomes a nation which only produces massive bonuses for international banksters.

I would go as far as saying if MN and DU and others are not started within the next year we are looking at a future which could lead to major civil and social unrest as most people will be still working for nothing other than high taxation.

I am actually scared that this new ultra globalist (Bilderburg/Tri-Lateralist) FG government could do something truly moronic and dangerous and cancel MN and DU. I don't trust them - they are as insane as FF and just as easily swayed by pathological journalist talking bollox.

We are building more than just a transport system - we are giving ourselves a chance of some kind of worth while future.

lods · 01-04-2011 12:39pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Hmm jokes aside I do see the need for a metro, I would think that Dublin Airport is a confusing mess if you are the first time in Ireland, as in trying to figure out how you get to city center, especially if you dont know English. Hell as someone who used the ariport many of times i was still stumped by car parking arrangements spending an hour looking for a carpark

In Geneva in comparison you can take a train/metro (mostly underground), tram or buses from airport for free, they even go as far as letting the visitors use the public transport (trams, buses, boats) etc for free
I wonder what it would do to tourism here if we had free transport.

Its not an Airport Metro. Bad signage is not a reason to have an Airport Metro

EDIT: Just checked the document - pretty much every detail on Metro North has been blacked out and there is very little on DartU and nothing new

Couldn't see it mentioned once

The point that I've made on this thread multiple times is that the money has to be available for these projects - beg, borrow or steal.

Steal seems to be the only option left open

Sponge Bob · 01-04-2011 2:35pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

Joking aside, this report sounds a very ominous warning for Metro North, Dart Underground and other PPP projects.

Thanks jack, I scanned and dirty OCRed it

METRO NORTH
Background
• Metro North will provide a rapid, high capacity, high frequency link between the city centre
and Estuary in Swords via Dublin Airport (journey time to Dublin Airport will be
approximately 20 minutes; total route approximately 16.5 km).
• The project is being procured as a Public Private Partnership (PPP) and the Railway
Procurement Agency (RPA) has short-listed two PPP consortia under the PPP procurement
process with a view to financial close in late 2012.
• lt is estimated that Metro North will generate 4,000 direct construction jobs for a significant
proportion of the main construction programme. In addition approximately 2000 indirect
jobs will be created due to secondary spin off impacts. The enabling works for the project
are estimated to generate close to 2,100job years of employment. This includes an estimate
of 250 jobs to be created in 2011.
Planning
• The Railway Order for Metro North became enforceable on 23rd December 2010. As part of
the Order, An Bord Pleanala (ABP) decided that that the depot for Metro North should be
relocated to south of the airport. RPA has now concluded its public consultation exercise
and the resulting preferred location selected. An Environmental Impact Statement will now
be prepared and an application made to ABP for a Railway Order to permit its construction.
A decision by ABP is anticipated by end Q3 2011.
Business Case
• During December 2010, the RPA provided the National Transport Authority (NTA) with an
addendum to theirluly 2010 Business Case which updated key issues and parameters taking
account of ABP conditions in the Railway Order; updated Cost Benefit Ratio 1.46:1 (was
1.55:1) and internal Rate of Return 8.65% (was 9.1%); when account is taken of wider
economic benefits, updated CBR 1.89:1 (was 2:1).
• The Business Case for Metro North has been independently reviewed by Booz and Co. on
behalf of the NTA. The review conciuded that Metro North is a value for money project
supportive of wider transport objectives for the Greater Dublin Area and that the economic
case for the project is strong.
• A final business case will be prepared following selection of preferred bidder and before
financial close.

and for comparison.

DART UNDERGROUND
Background to Project
• The DART Underground programme is made up of 2 elements —
• the development of an underground tunnel between Docklands and Inchicore
which will serve a number of key locations in the city centre with underground
stations.
• A series of related works including the Resignalling of the Northern and
Maynooth lines, electrification to Drogheda, Maynooth and Hazelhatch, the
Kildare Route Project involving four tracking on the Kildare line (which was
completed in 2010) and the expansion of the DART fleet and associated depot
facilities.
• The DART Underground Programme will deliver a second high capacity DART line which
will run underground through the heart 0f Dublin City Centre, The twin bore tunnels will
be approximately 7.6 Km in length and will connect the Northern and Kildare rail lines,
with underground stations strategically located at Spencer Dock, Pearse, St. Stephen*s
Green, Christchurch and Heuston Station, as well as a new surface DART station at
Inchicore, opening up new areas for travel by train.
• It is set to be developed with a capacity for up to 20 trains each direction per hour,
allowing up to 64,000 commuters to use the line hourly with capacity for DART services
to operate up to every 3 minutes and will dramatically increase frequency and capacity
for commuters on DART Northern, Maynooth and Kildare lines and relieve the current
congestion at Connolly Station.
• Crucially, DART Underground will link all rail systems - DART, Commuter, InterCity, Luas
and Metro (eg Metro North at St Stephens Green) to form an integrated and seamless
transport network that will increase the numbers travelling on the GDA rail system to
over 100 million passengersjourneys annually.
Current Position
• The tunnel element of the Programme was being developed as a Public Private
Partnership (PPP)- as a design, build, finance, maintain (DBFM) project. However, given
reduced funding available under the "National Recovery Plan 2011-2014/’ it will not
now be possible to deliver the tunnel element of the DART Underground Programme in
the immediate period.
• Some resignalling and associated works, part of the overall DART Underground
Programme, which have capacity benefits in and of themselves will proceed over the
next four years and this will prepare the network for the delivery of the underground

tunnel once financial resources permit. The National Transport Authority (NTA) is
currently examining the scope for the delivery of these associated works in the period to
2014.
Planning
• An Bord Pleanala commenced the oral hearing for the DART Underground on 22 November
2010. The Railway Order could be made by the end of 2011.
Business Case
• The economic case for the DART Underground Programme is very strong with a benefit to
cost ratio of 2.4. This result is robust to a series of sensitivity tests. The wider economic
benefits (WEBs) of the programme are particularly high.
• The business case for DART Underground was independently reviewed by Goodbody
consultants in 2010. They concluded that the Business Case supported a decision to proceed
with the Dart Underground project.

and the Capital Envelopes, €800m of they capital envelope is GONE as in already spent/allocated in the form of retention payments.

CAPITAL INVESTMENT PROGRAMME
Economic Difficulties and Reduced Allocations
Transport 21 (T21) was the 10-year capital investment framework established in 2005 to provide
for the development of transport infrastructure. At the launch of T21, a €34 billion investment
package was announced which comprised €26 billion to be provided by the Exchequer and €8
billion by Public Private Partnership {PPP) funding.
In the first 5 years of T21 Exchequer expenditure amounted to a total of over €10.5 billion.
T21 Expenditure 2006-2010* _'__
vear w 2007 2008 W 2010 Total
€billion 1.937 2.357 2.504 2.124 1.730 10.652
In addition, the 1“ PPP roads programme resulted in private sector funding of approx. €2 billion
Arising from the allocation under the National Recovery Plan in November 2010, a breakdown of
the reduced transport capital investment programme for 2011-2014 is as follows:
_ 2011 2012 2013 2014 mai
€m €rn €m €m €m
Public Transport 394 392 527 493 1,806
swans @ sas 510 asc 2,865
Other 54 S2 38 28 172
mai 1,438 Q 1,075 1,001 4,aaa
Note - Summary of Reductions:
The original exchequer allocation provided for T21 has been subject to a number of adjustments totalling
approx. €7 billion between 2008-2014 as follows:
2008-2010: total reductions of approx. €1 billion were implemented.
2011-2014: total reductions of almost €6 billion have been proposed for the four years covered by the
National Recovery Plan.
Committed Expenditure
Of the €4.843 billion allocated for 2011-2014, it is estimated that in the region of €1.7 billion of
this is contractually committed. Approximately €1.3 billion of this relates to committed
expenditure for national roads including approx. €800 million relating to closeout payments for
national roads projects recently completed. Over €300 million relates to committed
expenditure for public transport projects.
In addition, a significant portion of the overall transport capital investment programme is
essential for on-going annual expenditure programmes such as railway safety (€400 million),
road rehabilitation / maintenance (approx. €9OO million for regional & local roads), Coastguard
1 Expenditure between 2008 — 2010 reflected various cuts in the capital allocation for T21 projects
totalling approx. €1 billion.

»¢: `*y` ~`·— ,,.- *1·—=eti.·:ée;§:;y:.s’ is ‘ " ""’ . * *2* fl·&;2l;n=?‘>:»F::;;t3:42.;; *— . —~`-, :.
· ‘`
Assistant Secretary: John Murphy
Principal Officer: Doreen Keaney
Principal Advisor: Dominic Mullaney
CAPITAL INVESTMENT PROGRAMME
Economic Difficulties and Reduced Allocations
Transport 21 (T21) was the 10-year capital investment framework established in 2005 to provide
for the development of transport infrastructure. At the launch of T21, a €34 billion investment
package was announced which comprised €26 billion to be provided by the Exchequer and €8
billion by Public Private Partnership {PPP) funding.
In the first 5 years of T21 Exchequer expenditure amounted to a total of over €10.5 billion.
T21 Expenditure 2006-2010* _'__
vear w 2007 2008 W 2010 Total
€billion 1.937 2.357 2.504 2.124 1.730 10.652
In addition, the 1“ PPP roads programme resulted in private sector funding of approx. €2 billion
Arising from the allocation under the National Recovery Plan in November 2010, a breakdown of
the reduced transport capital investment programme for 2011-2014 is as follows:
_ 2011 2012 2013 2014 mai
€m €rn €m €m €m
Public Transport 394 392 527 493 1,806
swans @ sas 510 asc 2,865
Other 54 S2 38 28 172
mai 1,438 Q 1,075 1,001 4,aaa
Note - Summary of Reductions:
The original exchequer allocation provided for T21 has been subject to a number of adjustments totalling
approx. €7 billion between 2008-2014 as follows:
2008-2010: total reductions of approx. €1 billion were implemented.
2011-2014: total reductions of almost €6 billion have been proposed for the four years covered by the
National Recovery Plan.
Committed Expenditure
Of the €4.843 billion allocated for 2011-2014, it is estimated that in the region of €1.7 billion of
this is contractually committed. Approximately €1.3 billion of this relates to committed
expenditure for national roads including approx. €800 million relating to closeout payments for
national roads projects recently completed. Over €300 million relates to committed
expenditure for public transport projects.
In addition, a significant portion of the overall transport capital investment programme is
essential for on-going annual expenditure programmes such as railway safety (€400 million),
road rehabilitation / maintenance (approx. €9OO million for regional & local roads), Coastguard
1 Expenditure between 2008 — 2010 reflected various cuts in the capital allocation for T21 projects
totalling approx. €1 billion.

Search & Rescue (€30 million), maintaining progress on accessibility (€5O million) and traffic
management projects (€12O million).
Existing Capital Investment Priorities 2011-2014
Public Transport
A total ofjust over €1.8 billion has been provided for public transport projects in the National
Recovery Plan.
• Metro North is the major component of the public transport allocation. Enabling works
for Metro North are scheduled to commence in 2011 and the procurement process is
continuing.
• It will now not be possible to deliver the tunnel element of the DART Underground
programme in the immediate period. However, provision has been made for funding
some of the re-signalling and associated works, which have capacity benefits in and of
themselves.
· Funding will continue to be provided for vital public transport programmes such as
railway safety, traffic management, accessibility and real time passenger information
across the country. In Dublin the Luas extension to Citywest will be completed in 2011
and a new public transport bridge at Marlborough Street will commence construction.
• Planning will continue on a range of other public transport projects including Luas BXD,
the cross-city link, Luas extensions to Lucan and Bray, Metro West and the DART
Underground tunnel.
• Funding will also be provided for the purchase of new buses for PSO services.
• Further progress on Phase 2 of the Western Rail Corridor will be dependent on a review
of the performance of Phase 1 and a full economic assessment of Phase 2.
Roads .
There is funding of €1,820 million for national roads and €1,045 million available for regional &
local roads over the next four years.
• NRA have adequate money for rehabilitation and minor works in 2011 and will go ahead
with the planned 2011 starts including Belturbet, Longford and Tralee bypasses , N4
Downes grade separation and the Cork Southern Ring Road junctions. Two PPP projects
are also scheduled to start in 2011; the M17/18 Gort — Tuam PPP and lvl11/Newlands
Cross PPP bypasses.
• No major schemes are likely to start in 2012 or 2013 due to the shortage of funds. Due
to the reduction in funding from 2013 NRA plans to focus on maintenance of existing
assets and the incremental improvement of national secondary roads.
Other Funding
• €172 million has been earmarked for other projects over the next four years. Almost
half of this will be provided to support Smarter Travel Policy measures, mainly
comprising of investment in exemplary cycling and walking infrastructure.
• Just over €50 million is being provided to Maritime and Irish Coast Guard projects; the
main focus of this investment being the cost of a new build S92 Helicopter for the Irish
Coast Guard (IRCG) Search and Rescue (SAR) helicopter service and payments in respect
of remedial works being carried out at regional harbours.
• In addition, €2O million in total is being provided in 2011 and 2012 to partially fund the
Cross-Border A5 Road (North West Gateway to Aughnacloyj project.

monument · 01-04-2011 2:45pm

Not sure if this is an April Fools joke or even related to MN...

But what was described by the European Investment Bank as a high level delegation is currently visiting Ireland looking at a number of projects.

Ireland recently was reported to be one of the worst for under using the EIB. Could the article a while back that it would fund more the €500m promised be true?

Sponge Bob · 01-04-2011 2:53pm

c.€170m of EIB funds which should have been partly or wholly drawn down by now is lying on a shelf since the M18 PPP Project effectively collapsed late last year (The Gort -Tuam Project) . Either that or it was used partly or wholly for the land purchasing in 2010 and now nobody will build the road on that land.

I am sure the EIB are all ears

Anyway the PPP section in the Dept of Finance has nothing to do except attend meetings nowadays.

monument · 01-04-2011 5:12pm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

c.€170m of EIB funds which should have been partly or wholly drawn down by now is lying on a shelf since the M18 PPP Project effectively collapsed late last year (The Gort -Tuam Project) . Either that or it was used partly or wholly for the land purchasing in 2010 and now nobody will build the road on that land.

I am sure the EIB are all ears

Anyway the PPP section in the Dept of Finance has nothing to do except attend meetings nowadays.

Overall Ireland hasn't got much loans from the EIB compared to most EU states.

From RTE today... it sounds like more loans (maybe not for MN at all, but more)...

A senior official from the European Investment Bank has said the measures announced by the Government yesterday are 'very thorough' and will do a lot to renew international confidence in the Irish banking system.

Plutarchos Sakellaris, European Investment Bank Vice President responsible for operations in Ireland, said it was important that the Irish Government met its obligation to carry out a stress test of banks here.

A delegation from the EIB is in Ireland to meet the new Minister for Finance and others in order to match its lending programme to national development priorities.

Anyway, here's the EIB press release:

PRESS RELEASE

1st April, 2011

European Investment Bank to reinforce engagement in Ireland

The European Investment Bank today outlined current support for projects in Ireland and emphasised commitment to the country during the economic crisis. During 2010 the long-term lending institution of the European Union provided EUR 241 million for the Whitegate Power Plant, Bord Gais’s first major electricity station, as well as investment in six schools across the country. Over the last five years the European Investment Bank has provided EUR 2.6 billion for investment in Ireland.

Michael Noonan, Irish Minister of Finance said: "I am pleased to say that my discussions with the European Investment Bank have outlined a range of projects where EIB funding can contribute to transport and education infrastructure, funding for small businesses and other key sectors across the country. I look forward to working with the EIB in its financing of key infrastructure projects to support economic growth in Ireland."

Plutarchos Sakellaris, European Investment Bank Vice President responsible for operations in Ireland, said: “The European Investment Bank is committed to supporting Ireland during challenging economic times. We are working closely with public bodies, leading companies and SMEs to ensure continued key capital investment. We are confident that industry, transport, social infrastructure, health and education will continue to benefit from EIB support in the years to come.”

Over 1500 Irish small and medium sized companies benefitted from funds provided by the European Investment Bank to local partner banks over the last five years.

The European Investment Bank is evaluating possible loans for a number of projects in Ireland, including additional SME funding, transport and knowledge economy lending for education infrastructure.

The EIB is considering lending up to EUR 90 million to finance construction work at University College Dublin in Ireland to finance the first and second phase of the total EUR 292 million university development, including a new science centre, refurbishment and new construction of student residences, construction of a new science building and law school law.

Notes for Editors:

• The European Investment Bank is the world’s largest multinational financial institution and last year lent EUR 72 billion for 460 projects around the world.
• The European Investment Bank was created by the Treaty of Rome in 1958 as the long-term lending bank of the European Union. The task of the Bank is to contribute towards the integration, balanced development and economic and social cohesion of the EU Member States. The EIB raises substantial volumes of funds on the capital markets which it lends on favourable terms to projects furthering EU policy objectives. The EIB operates on a non-profit maximizing basis and lends at close to the cost of borrowing.
• A high-level European Investment Bank Delegation is currently visiting Dublin to see how future lending can best match national priorities. Meetings will be held with Minister of Finance Michael Noonan, Central Bank Governor Patrick Honohan and Michael Tutty, Chairman of the Commission for Energy Regulation.

dynamick · 01-04-2011 6:02pm

DWCommuter · 01-04-2011 10:45pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjMfQG4DejQ

Roy calls it right!:D

DWCommuter · 01-04-2011 11:48pm

Jack Noble wrote: »

Agree 100% - but we can't magic the money out of thin air. That's the problem the new government faces thanks to the legacy of the FF-PD/Green years.

Which is why none of this will be built. It is indeed over and I laugh at the ineptitude of this country but yet feel very saddened that we are actually back before DART times because at least we could borrow money to build that.

When I sat in Dublin Castle at the launch of T21, I looked at the top table and thought to myself, you really are a bunch of assholes re-spinning a lot of what was there before. I knew then that time had run out. At the time I was a very strict anti WRC campaigner and was rightly pissed off that phase one was to be sanctioned even though DU and MN were apparently in the mix. A glorified trainspotter (and WRC obsessive) tapped me on the back and said, " you got what you wanted too". I wanted to slap him in the head, because I could clearly see that the WRC phase one was a cheapo deal that would be done and that DU and MN were just re-invented with glossy graphics and would just become fantasy promises. I gave a very emotional interview to RTE news which wasn't used, but by christ if they had it now it would be more than relevant.

Prior to that fateful day in November 2005, we could have been well advanced on DU and MN, but politicians procrastinated and lied in an outright fashion, because we just don't do visionary public transport in Ireland and we never will. They are happy now because they have the financial excuses. It reinforces the fact that even if the money was flowing they would still find excuses. We blew billions and billions in the good times and built little in terms of rail projects. Now we are blowing billions and billions of borrowed money just to keep the ship afloat. How can any of you possibly be positive about MN etc.???

Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Comments