Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Three 25X's taken off the route!!!!

Options
  • 08-10-2007 6:25pm
    #1
    Snake Plisken
    Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭


    Ok

    I take the 25x at 7.10 from Lucan, it normally came from Adamstown station and turned up right at the Finnstown Triffic lights, anyway for the last couple of mornings its gone down by Superquinn and come back up but this adds another 5-10 mins to the journey, So I rang Phibsboro Depot to find out has the route changed as the Bus is now full after about 4 stops, and the controller told me that Mortons complained to the Department of Transport about the number of 25X's on the route and the Department of Transport decided to pull the licences off Dublin Bus so they had to reduce the number of 25X's by 3!!!!! I really don't give a crap about Mortons, If Dublin Bus wants to increase the number of 25x's to surve the population so be it, If Morton's can't compete I don't really care, as I said less people in Lucan can get the 25x now as there are 3 less on the Route. Anyway I'm going to get on to the local Politicians to get them to get onto the Dept of Transport to sort this mess out.


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    markf909
    Closed Accounts Posts: 461 ✭✭markf909


    Just like the folks getting the 41x through the Port tunnel, once more the ordinary punter gets screwed so "competition" can be seen to work.


  • Options
    #3
    SickCert
    Closed Accounts Posts: 538 ✭✭✭SickCert


    Sad isnt it, the only way Mortons can compete is if they reduce the old reliable DB service. Sure they might get another slot on Prime Time!


  • Options
    #4
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    This little further example of a Jittery Civil Service came to light only last Friday (5th)
    At this juncture the only verified occurrence is that the Dept of Transport contacted Bus Atha Cliath at a late hour and "Instructed" the company to withdraw a specified number of buses from the Adamstown area.

    The reasons for the Departments action remain unclear but considerable speculation is ongoing and given the area in question the largest target is Paul Morton`s operation.

    However,this may well prove to be mere uninformed speculation,as the Department of Transport has more than enough of it`s own "Talent" to stage this stunt itself.

    The current edition of Business & Finance Mag has a comprehensive article on the EU "Investigation" into Bus Atha Cliath`s financial relationship with the Irish State.
    Perhaps the most worrying aspect of this entire scernario is the typically EU gusto with which the problem is being approached.

    Thus it appears the EU require a complete breakdown of the States contribution to EVERY Bus Stop in the BAC system.
    This information will require a serious amount of physical input as well as theoritical calculus in order to provide the required information.

    There is much else of course,but the prospect of bean counters being replaced by Bus Stop counters does not fill me with any great hope of a coherent final report.

    Either way,The Department of Transport is merely carrying on a noble tradition of acting forcibly AGAINST the greater immediate public interest.
    The instruction given at the 11th hour to pull the original 84X some years ago remains uppermost in my mind.
    Staff,Buses,and Customers all waiting in the cold night air whilst a frock-coated senior civil servant dipped a quill into an inkpot and issued a resounding NO far more suited to the Rev Paisley at his best.
    Similarly the 41X scam displayed the same nonchalant and total disregard for their masters electorate.

    Its also interesting to note the difference in attitude between BAC and the Private Sector.
    The 41X scenario witnessed the Dept confirming that the existence of a prior licence application for the route meant it could not issue BAC licence.
    BAC Immediately conformed with the Departments instruction to Cease operating it.

    The current situation with a new South Dublin to Airport service mirrors this with one important difference,the private in this case has continued to operate uninterrupted without a licence and shown no sign of conforming with the Departments cease and desist request.

    Who IS in charge...? The Secretary of the Department ? The Minister for Transport ? The Gardai ?The Taoiseach ? The EU ?

    The answer appears to be None of the Above and we expect the EU commission to make sense of this..? :o


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Options
    #5
    Davidth88
    Registered Users Posts: 3,181 ✭✭✭Davidth88


    I for one am fed up with the situation re the stupid halfway bus sitation .

    Celbridge is suffering because of Mortons, Dublin Bus have busses earmarked to improve the 67 service that are sitting there because they are not allowed to change the timetable.

    Then Mortons are , cutting the service during the day , and getting rid of the evening service.

    I have no loyalty to any company , but the way private bus companies can basically hold areas to ransom is frankly stupid.


  • Options
    #6
    Washout
    Registered Users Posts: 2,911 ✭✭✭Washout


    absolute disgrace this is.
    for one thing Mortons do absolutely nothing to try to entice my custom.
    if you go to their website.
    http://www.circlelinebus.com/ you cant find a timetable so i have no idea how often this service runs and from where and what route it takes into town.
    If they cannot provide a half decent service what exactly gives them the right to complain.
    During School/college years the 25x runs to capacity and now people along the route are forced to take a 25a and then another bus from town.

    Dublin Bus also offer a good montly bus/luas ticket price which i believe to be fare but i have no idea if mortons are the same cheaper or dearer.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    SickCert
    Closed Accounts Posts: 538 ✭✭✭SickCert


    Washout wrote:
    if you go to their website.
    http://www.circlelinebus.com/ you cant find a timetable so i have no idea how often this service runs and from where and what route it takes into town..

    'This website is under construction'

    Any other info around?


  • Options
    #8
    Washout
    Registered Users Posts: 2,911 ✭✭✭Washout


    SickCert wrote:
    'This website is under construction'

    Any other info around?


    my point is that mortons are complaining about a company running a decent enough service wheras there is no information available about the service that they run themselves.


  • Options
    #9
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Washout wrote:
    my point is that mortons are complaining about a company running a decent enough service wheras there is no information available about the service that they run themselves.
    and a very good point that is. What exactly is the minimum service level rquired by the dept before they will consider an application for a licence? Providing a website with at least a map/timetable in 2007 (to me) should be a minimum requirement.

    It always goes back to the politicians. The civil servants do the dirty work and are culpable, but the politicians are ultimately responsible. Buses belonging to the private sector should have to conform to a common Dublin fleet colour, just like London, with their own logo being the only visible differentiator. They should have access to common bus stops. They should fall under a common integrated ticketing structure (the most important obviously) but as alek says, who is in charge (of this country)?


  • Options
    #10
    KC61
    Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    This problem is far wider than just the 25X.

    The politicians have let this fester and fester. We are now in a situation of effective paralysis of new services due to an EU investigation into State support of Irish bus services operated by Bus Eireann and Dublin Bus.

    I think that the resulting passenger fury and this investigation may well trigger some action - but who will benefit?

    Ultimately a customer focussed operation is required and there is only one model that delivers that - TfL!


  • Options
    #11
    .G.
    Registered Users Posts: 5,415 ✭✭✭.G.


    By all means have a go at your local TD for this happening but I wouldn't be asking him to sort Mortons out I'd be asking him to explain why such a situation has been allowed to occur despite well sign posted warning signs of it happening for many a year.I believe that DB shouldn't be made to remove buses unless Circleline can effectively replace them with their own which it appears they can't at the moment.It's a scenario in which only joe public loses out as usual, but Circleline are partly responsible for DB having to up their game in this area since they arrived on the scene.I often wonder if Circleline buggered off as many DB men would like them too would DB continue to throw buses at the lucan corridor like confetti?,they didn't give a toss about it before hand.

    Unfortunately stuff like this happening was missed when we signed up to the ol EEC back in the day and now we shall suffer till someone puts joe public ahead of any operators needs.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    KC61
    Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    murphaph wrote:
    and a very good point that is. What exactly is the minimum service level rquired by the dept before they will consider an application for a licence? Providing a website with at least a map/timetable in 2007 (to me) should be a minimum requirement.

    It always goes back to the politicians. The civil servants do the dirty work and are culpable, but the politicians are ultimately responsible. Buses belonging to the private sector should have to conform to a common Dublin fleet colour, just like London, with their own logo being the only visible differentiator. They should have access to common bus stops. They should fall under a common integrated ticketing structure (the most important obviously) but as alek says, who is in charge (of this country)?

    There are no minimum standards of public information required.

    The whole focus is operator driven - i.e. who should provide a service, and not customer driven - i.e. where is a service required?


  • Options
    #13
    KC61
    Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    superg wrote:
    By all means have a go at your local TD for this happening but I wouldn't be asking him to sort Mortons out I'd be asking him to explain why such a situation has been allowed to occur despite well sign posted warning signs of it happening for many a year.I believe that DB shouldn't be made to remove buses unless Circleline can effectively replace them with their own which it appears they can't at the moment.It's a scenario in which only joe public loses out as usual, but Circleline are partly responsible for DB having to up their game in this area since they arrived on the scene.I often wonder if Circleline buggered off as many DB men would like them too would DB continue to throw buses at the lucan corridor like confetti?,they didn't give a toss about it before hand.

    Unfortunately stuff like this happening was missed when we signed up to the ol EEC back in the day and now we shall suffer till someone puts joe public ahead of any operators needs.

    Mortons/Circle Line are not the fundamental problem here. The Department of Transport and the Government are. The complete lack of any proper customer focussed public transport system in this country is the problem.

    Mortons and Circle Line are merely forcing the Government's hand here as their viewpoint is that unless they do something the status quo will be maintained - i.e. an effective monopoly being subsidised and no subsidy to private operators.

    Complain to your TD but not about Mortons. Complain about the lack of any coherent public transport policy and years of inaction in this area, and the effects that this ludicrous policy decision is having on ordinary public transport users. That is where the focus needs to be.


  • Options
    #14
    Dub13
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,252 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    I believe there is no minimum standards full stop.For years Dublin Bus has wanted to merge the 102 and the 230 as they run the same route for maybe 70% of the route with the 102 going from Sutton Dart station to malahide and the 230 from Portmarnock to the Airport.

    Some private operator put a block on this as they had a smiler license,fair enough you would think but the private operator is not even operating a service at all.There is a body of taught that was mentioned to me before by someone cant remember who,basically he thinks the private operators are just holding onto these valuable licenses on till the market is fully opened to competition and a then the big players come in and buy up all the licenses.I don't know if there is any truth is this but it could well be true.


  • Options
    #15
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    You may well have a point Dub13.
    One interesting little nugget to surface recently is the fact that currently there are in excess of 600 Road Passenger Service Licences held by the PRIVATE sector.
    This is substantially more than the number held by both Bus Atha Cliath AND Bus Eireann.
    :rolleyes:


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Options
    #16
    .G.
    Registered Users Posts: 5,415 ✭✭✭.G.


    KC61 wrote:
    Mortons/Circle Line are not the fundamental problem here. The Department of Transport and the Government are. The complete lack of any proper customer focussed public transport system in this country is the problem.

    Mortons and Circle Line are merely forcing the Government's hand here as their viewpoint is that unless they do something the status quo will be maintained - i.e. an effective monopoly being subsidised and no subsidy to private operators.

    Complain to your TD but not about Mortons. Complain about the lack of any coherent public transport policy and years of inaction in this area, and the effects that this ludicrous policy decision is having on ordinary public transport users. That is where the focus needs to be.

    Is that not what I said?

    I totally agree Mortons/Cirlceline are not the problem and our antiquated systems of government are.People who believe otherwise are either ill informed members of the public or part of the minor percentage of employees of DB who think their operation is perfection itself and competition in any form is the spawn of the devil


  • Options
    #17
    John R
    Registered Users Posts: 4,107 ✭✭✭John R


    superg wrote:

    I totally agree Mortons/Cirlceline are not the problem

    They are not the architects of the current disgrace but they are certainly using the system to their own advantage without any consideration of the effect it has on people who only wish to avail of decent public transport.

    Mortons/CircleLine are far from innocent parties and if anyone directly effected by their complaints to the DoT wish to complain to whomever they like about them they should feel free.

    The FACT is that because this company believe that a large chunk of West Dublin should be reserved for only themselves a great deal of people are NOW suffering a worse or non-existant bus service.

    As well as the 25X cancellations it is also known that the 66 and 67/A routes have been denied much needed improvements and the rapidly growing Adamstown area has had it's direct QBC route cancelled which would otherwise already be in full operation.

    Another opportunity to have good public transport in place before a new development is populated is lost due to commercial greed and political incompetence/corruption.

    Meanwhile Circleline has shown it's commitment to public services by cancelling evening services on it's one and only full route without any notice to intending passengers.

    superg wrote:
    and our antiquated systems of government are.

    I assume that is referring to the 193x transport acts which are now a standard scapegoat for these disgraceful governmental decisions.

    The truth of that is the acts in question are being abused by the DoT, their political masters and certain private operators some of which do not even bother applying for licences. Those acts although antique could, if properly used, provide for a very decent base to allow both CIE and private companies run necessary and ACCOUNTABLE bus services. They allow for considerable oversight to ensure that the primary concern would be to serve the needs of the travelling public and not special interests, well-connected "businessmen", speculators and vote-whoring politicians.

    For reference please read my analysis of those acts (or read the acts themselves and come to your own conclusions) from post #4 in this thread



    superg wrote:
    People who believe otherwise are either ill informed members of the public or part of the minor percentage of employees of DB who think their operation is perfection itself and competition in any form is the spawn of the devil

    Or maybe they are just people who don't give a fúck about the name on the bus they use but are quite rightly pissed off when they hear that one bus operator has successfully lobbied the government to remove a bus service they relied upon without any intention of providing a suitable replacement themselves.

    It sounds to me like you are not exactly an impartial observer in this matter either, you wouldn't happen to have a connection to any party in this dispute would you?


  • Options
    #18
    Snake Plisken
    Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    John R,

    You talk a lot of sense and know a great deal about this issue, I was just wondering what is the best thing that us Joe Public can do? Do we complain to our local TD's ? Do we get on to the Local Lucan Gazette?(Whom I seem to recall running a crappy article about Mortons threatening to pull some of their buses out of Lucan recently), do we contact Department of Transport?
    Its a bloody disgrace that no one is doing anything about this or taking the whole issue seriously.

    Thanks

    Snake


  • Options
    #19
    OMcGovern
    Closed Accounts Posts: 503 ✭✭✭OMcGovern


    Snake Plisken wrote:
    ...So I rang Phibsboro Depot to find out has the route changed as the Bus is now full after about 4 stops, and the controller told me that Mortons complained to the Department of Transport about the number of 25X's on the route and the Department of Transport decided to pull the licences off Dublin Bus so they had to reduce the number of 25X's by 3!!!!!

    Cheers for posting this info, much appreciated.
    The loss of 3 buses has definitely been noticed.

    Is there anyway to publish this to a wider audience, ie. the local Lucan newspapers were mentioned or maybe the Evening Herald ?
    I posted a story about my sister nearly being abducted and a Herald reporter picked it up and published it.

    Failing that... maybe we can picket the bus stops were Mortons pick up passengers... call them scabs, hurl abuse etc.. like the old English miner strikes and pickets :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #20
    Snake Plisken
    Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    Maybe someone like Sen Shane Ross could look into this as it seems to be an issue right across Dublin and he did a great job fighting the Toll bridge fiasco.


  • Options
    #21
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    Well,given how the senior civil servants who actually impliment "Policy" are deeply suspicious of media publicity perhaps an attempt to force the Secretrary General of the Department of Transport into adopting a higher media profile by actually explaining and accounting for the Dept`s ever more bizzarre decisions might help......:p


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,329 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    I use mortons almost every day but Im annoyed withnthem because they have no busses between 7:45 a.m. and 9:20 a.m. Granted that the last 25X I can get is around 8:10 or so, but I can't understand why more 25X users don't use mortons as it is cheaper when available.


  • Options
    #23
    .G.
    Registered Users Posts: 5,415 ✭✭✭.G.


    John R wrote: »
    They are not the architects of the current disgrace but they are certainly using the system to their own advantage without any consideration of the effect it has on people who only wish to avail of decent public transport.

    Mortons/CircleLine are far from innocent parties and if anyone directly effected by their complaints to the DoT wish to complain to whomever they like about them they should feel free.

    The FACT is that because this company believe that a large chunk of West Dublin should be reserved for only themselves a great deal of people are NOW suffering a worse or non-existant bus service.

    As well as the 25X cancellations it is also known that the 66 and 67/A routes have been denied much needed improvements and the rapidly growing Adamstown area has had it's direct QBC route cancelled which would otherwise already be in full operation.

    Another opportunity to have good public transport in place before a new development is populated is lost due to commercial greed and political incompetence/corruption.

    Meanwhile Circleline has shown it's commitment to public services by cancelling evening services on it's one and only full route without any notice to intending passengers.




    I assume that is referring to the 193x transport acts which are now a standard scapegoat for these disgraceful governmental decisions.

    The truth of that is the acts in question are being abused by the DoT, their political masters and certain private operators some of which do not even bother applying for licences. Those acts although antique could, if properly used, provide for a very decent base to allow both CIE and private companies run necessary and ACCOUNTABLE bus services. They allow for considerable oversight to ensure that the primary concern would be to serve the needs of the travelling public and not special interests, well-connected "businessmen", speculators and vote-whoring politicians.

    For reference please read my analysis of those acts (or read the acts themselves and come to your own conclusions) from post #4 in this thread






    Or maybe they are just people who don't give a fúck about the name on the bus they use but are quite rightly pissed off when they hear that one bus operator has successfully lobbied the government to remove a bus service they relied upon without any intention of providing a suitable replacement themselves.

    It sounds to me like you are not exactly an impartial observer in this matter either, you wouldn't happen to have a connection to any party in this dispute would you?

    No I don't.You assume incorrectly that I'm refering to the acts themselves,merely how they are used.I'm not an expert on the transport acts,haven't read them and don't intend to.A licence was granted,said licence gives the holder a say in how many buses are operated by its competitor on the route covered by said licence and thats the crux of the issue.I don't need to read the acts to know that,especially as I haven't commented on the acts themselves merely the madness of the licences issued under them.I agree the current transport acts are being utilised in a way that is not healthy for the consumer.IMO It is not Mortons fault that this is the case,they are free to object since they have been granted a licence on that route by the DoT and have a commercial interest to protect.I wholly agree that this is against the best interest of the consumers but I can't agree that Mortons are to blame for that situation occuring, which is what has annoyed me in this discussion.IMO The DoT are to blame for allowing licences be issued that prevent Dublin Bus from providing the extra buses that are required. It is the system,or more so those operating it, thats at fault as a previous poster pointed out,the system is used at present to suit the licence holder not the travelling public and that is where the problem lie's.

    If you read my post you will notice I said it was wrong that Dublin bus be told to remove buses that are clearly needed on Mortons say so but what is more wrong is that their licence allows them to exercise that right.Their licence allows them to protect their commercial interest,be that right or wrong for the consumer,it's that situation being allowed to occur thats the problem,not a private operator,be it Mortons or anyone else protecting their interests.

    On your last point,3 25x's are gone so for the moment,If people don't care what name is on the bus then why don't they hop on one of the 3 Mortons buses between 7.15 and 7.45?They go the same way.

    No need for bad language.


  • Options
    #24
    Snake Plisken
    Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    Because they are unreliable, I want to use one bus company and buy one weekly Rambler ticket that will get me in and out of town, ok I could get a Morton's bus in the morning but the hopes of getting one that I want in the evening are pretty low, when I can jump on a 25A every 10-15 mins. So no I won't be using Mortons anytime soon.


  • Options
    #25
    MiniD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 371 ✭✭MiniD


    superg wrote: »

    On your last point,3 25x's are gone so for the moment,If people don't care what name is on the bus then why don't they hop on one of the 3 Mortons buses between 7.15 and 7.45?They go the same way.

    Because most commuters use prepaid tickets, some monthly, some annual. A lot of commuters avail of tax saver tickets provided by their employer. Some commuters need to connect with different buses to complete their journey. There are lots of reasons why passengers cannot use Mortons buses.

    Again, the bigger problem here, is why does Dublin STILL not have integrated ticketing?


  • Options
    #26
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    Ah MiniD....a VERY good question,and one which ain`t going to be answered anyway soon.
    In fact if one does the Civil Service "Reading between the Lines" stuff it now looks as if it won`t be in Q1 of the 21st Century.
    The last appearance of the Secretary General of the Dept of Transport in front of the a Dail Committee and the Comptroller General managed to bring forth an admission that the Sec Gen was Concerned (?) at the level of expenditure already incurred.

    In addition it now seems as if the Dept of Finance has taken an interest in the €40 Million already spent on what appears to be....well....Nothing...!

    It should be remembered that even after some stinging commentary from the C&AG and Dail Committee`s on this fiasco not ONE senior figure has been publicly called to account.

    The only shadow we have seen to move is a recruitment notice for a new "Project Manager" for the programme...which may well mean that the thing had no management in place to begin with....Ho Hum...Nothing new there so... :rolleyes:


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Options
    #27
    John R
    Registered Users Posts: 4,107 ✭✭✭John R


    superg wrote: »
    No I don't.You assume incorrectly that I'm refering to the acts themselves,merely how they are used.I'm not an expert on the transport acts,haven't read them and don't intend to.A licence was granted,said licence gives the holder a say in how many buses are operated by its competitor on the route covered by said licence and thats the crux of the issue.I don't need to read the acts to know that

    No, you don't. that is the advantage of actively dodging the facts you don't need to be constrained by the truth when offering what can only be described as mis-informed opinions.
    superg wrote: »
    I agree the current transport acts are being utilised in a way that is not healthy for the consumer.IMO It is not Mortons fault that this is the case,they are free to object since they have been granted a licence on that route by the DoT and have a commercial interest to protect.I wholly agree that this is against the best interest of the consumers but I can't agree that Mortons are to blame for that situation occuring, which is what has annoyed me in this discussion.IMO The DoT are to blame for allowing licences be issued that prevent Dublin Bus from providing the extra buses that are required. It is the system,or more so those operating it, thats at fault as a previous poster pointed out,the system is used at present to suit the licence holder not the travelling public and that is where the problem lie's.

    If you actually deigned to read the links I provided you would see that in no way does the LAW provide for any such thing. The licences issued to Mortons under that law cannot give them the right to dictate the services provided by another operator.

    Decisions on what services CIE can or cannot operate are entirely at the discretion of the Minister for Transport. As are decisions on the continuation, alteration or removal of licences to private individuals.

    superg wrote: »
    IMO The DoT are to blame for allowing licences be issued that prevent Dublin Bus from providing the extra buses that are required. It is the system,or more so those operating it, thats at fault as a previous poster pointed out,the system is used at present to suit the licence holder not the travelling public and that is where the problem lie's.

    If you read my post you will notice I said it was wrong that Dublin bus be told to remove buses that are clearly needed on Mortons say so but what is more wrong is that their licence allows them to exercise that right.Their licence allows them to protect their commercial interest,be that right or wrong for the consumer,it's that situation being allowed to occur thats the problem,not a private operator,be it Mortons or anyone else protecting their interests.[/QUOTE]

    Except that by READING the licencing laws it is clear that that is not the case. The decisions to protect Mortons commercial interests are being made by people in the DoT under the control of the Minister and are clearly in contravention to the spirit and the letter of the relevant laws. The question is why are these decisions being made. Someone is clearly benefitting from these decisions and it needs to be asked exactly how innocent those parties who are benefitting from these decisions are?


    superg wrote: »
    No need for bad language.

    If you wish to apply for the job as boards.ie censor please forward your application HERE

    and while you are at it how about fixing your space bar.


  • Options
    #28
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    Perhaps this is slightly off-topic...

    If our Mister for Transport woke up tomorrow with a set of balls and decided to adopt the London tendering process for Dublin, would he be able to revoke all the existing licenses that Aircoach, Mortons, etc have and force them to operate under a common DTA farebox, timetabling, etc or would we have a daft situation where there would be a mixture of old and new license holders with Mortons still calling the shots?


  • Options
    #29
    John R
    Registered Users Posts: 4,107 ✭✭✭John R


    Snake Plisken wrote: »
    John R,

    You talk a lot of sense and know a great deal about this issue, I was just wondering what is the best thing that us Joe Public can do? Do we complain to our local TD's ? Do we get on to the Local Lucan Gazette?(Whom I seem to recall running a crappy article about Mortons threatening to pull some of their buses out of Lucan recently), do we contact Department of Transport?
    Its a bloody disgrace that no one is doing anything about this or taking the whole issue seriously.

    Options A or B would be worth doing although I don't fancy your chances of getting any positive action. Your TD will if you are lucky ask a few questions in the direction of the Minister and return to you some of the useless stock replies that say nothing. Contacting the DOT is IMO a giant waste of time, they have and will block all attempts from the public to uncover any of the facts behind the issue. I have no idea what the local rag would do but from dealings with a number of Irish journalists over the years a well-researched accurate piece would not be the most likely outcome, I would be happy for the Lucan Gazette to prove me wrong though.

    Even Freedom of Information Act requests get hit with a brick wall, they claim that even revealing what routes they have issued licences for is "commercially sensitive" and refuse to give any details. Added to the fact that the FF/PD government drastically increased the fees for FOI requests and appeals they obviously feel safe in the knowledge that nobody will uncover their carry-on.

    In some countries governments publish timetables, maps, journey planners and real-time information on public bus services. In Ireland even the names of those who have been given what amounts to exclusive licences to operate public bus services are effectively state secrets.

    Tin-Pot dictators must look upon our "civil service" with envy, the zeal and efficiency they put into sticking it to the public is truly inspiring.


  • Options
    #30
    John R
    Registered Users Posts: 4,107 ✭✭✭John R


    markpb wrote: »
    Perhaps this is slightly off-topic...

    If our Mister for Transport woke up tomorrow with a set of balls and decided to adopt the London tendering process for Dublin, would he be able to revoke all the existing licenses that Aircoach, Mortons, etc have and force them to operate under a common DTA farebox, timetabling, etc or would we have a daft situation where there would be a mixture of old and new license holders with Mortons still calling the shots?

    If he grew a set of balls he could force all those conditions onto the current licence holders under the current system with the probable exception of the common farebox, he could still force them to use a set fare table that was common with all other operations.

    conditions to passenger licences.

    12.—Whenever the Minister grants a passenger licence he may attach to such licence such conditions as he shall think proper and shall specify in such licence and, in particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, conditions in respect of all or any of the following matters, that is to say:—


    ( a ) the terminal points and route of the passenger road service to which such licence relates;


    ( b ) the frequency of such service, including variations of such frequency on different days or at different periods of each day;


    ( c ) the daily duration of such service;


    ( d ) the minimum number of vehicles to be kept available for the operation of such service;


    ( e ) the type of vehicle to be used on such service;


    ( f ) the maintenance of a particular standard of fitness, cleanliness, and appearance of the vehicles used on such service and the organisation to be kept available for the maintenance of that standard;


    ( g ) appointing or restricting the distinctive marks and numbers on or the colours of the vehicles used on such service;


    ( h ) the publication of the time-tables of and charges on such service and the display of such time-tables and charges in the vehicles used on such service;


    ( i ) the notification to the Minister or to the public of alterations in the time-tables of and charges on such service;


    ( j ) the notification to and approval by the Minister of agreements or arrangements made in relation to such service by the licensee under such licence with other persons engaged in the transport of passengers by rail, road or water, or any of them;


    ( k ) the rates of wages and hours of duty of employees and agreements or arrangements in reference thereto in the working of the passenger road service to which a licence relates.

    In any event the 1932 act only allows for ANNUAL licences and gives the Minister wide scope fror the revocation of them at any other time.
    13.—(1) Every annual passenger licence shall specify the date on which it commences and every such licence shall commence on the day so specified.


    (2) Every annual passenger licence shall (unless it is previously revoked under this Act and subject to any suspension under this Act) continue in force until midnight on the 31st day of October next after the date on which it commenced and shall then expire unless it is renewed under this Act.


    This is the sad truth of the matter, we could now (or many years ago for that matter) have a combination of public and private bus operators both running under strict control to provide ONE integrated service to the city without one single new law having to be enacted.

    Despite all the pro-private enterprise bluster of the previous FF/PD crowd as well as effectively hobbling DB/BE they also stifled any realistic chance for proper expansion of private operations with the notable exception of a handful of operations who have milked the situation for all they could.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    .G.
    Registered Users Posts: 5,415 ✭✭✭.G.


    John R wrote: »
    No, you don't. that is the advantage of actively dodging the facts you don't need to be constrained by the truth when offering what can only be described as mis-informed opinions.



    If you actually deigned to read the links I provided you would see that in no way does the LAW provide for any such thing. The licences issued to Mortons under that law cannot give them the right to dictate the services provided by another operator.

    Decisions on what services CIE can or cannot operate are entirely at the discretion of the Minister for Transport. As are decisions on the continuation, alteration or removal of licences to private individuals.




    If you read my post you will notice I said it was wrong that Dublin bus be told to remove buses that are clearly needed on Mortons say so but what is more wrong is that their licence allows them to exercise that right.Their licence allows them to protect their commercial interest,be that right or wrong for the consumer,it's that situation being allowed to occur thats the problem,not a private operator,be it Mortons or anyone else protecting their interests.




    Spacebar is fine thanks but I'll pass on your concern to it.It appears to me your view is slightly biased against private operators.If I ever wish to depress myself I'll read them,nothing quite as boring as reading legislation.SO Mortons licence dosen't give them a say in DB service levels,so what,regardless of why Mortons where able to do what they did it still doesn't make it their fault that their wishes where granted and you can spout all the stuff you like at me that FACT dosen't change.
    So like I originally said and this is backed up by what you've said,If the original poster wishes to complain they they should complain to their TD about the actions of the Minister and DoT not Mortons cos Mortons could have been told where to go but weren't.

    I have no wish to become censor,I thought I stumbled upon and adult conversation where I could offer an opinion without being responded to with abusive language:rolleyes:,since thats not the case I'll leave you to tap away at your keyboard in anger at someone else while I carry on with my life with my original opinions still rock solid.

    No response required as I won't be reading it.Take care.:p


Advertisement