Dublin bus price increase

Pigman II · 10-01-2008 9:58am

The fare that costs €1.50 in 2008 cost just €1.05 in 2002.

KC61 · 10-01-2008 10:03am

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

The 16/16A suffer from chronic traffic congestion along the entire route, particularly in the Beaumont area and south of the city centre where there is insufficient road space for a bus lane on either side of the road. At 1845 in Terenure 3 16A buses showed up within minutes of each other southbound, two of which were running dead late.

Unless DB get more buses to have extra buses starting in the city centre on the route in the evening peak, it's going to stay like this.

Unfortunately, I would think most routes were suffering from this malaise last night as traffic ground to a standstill.

KC61 · 10-01-2008 10:08am

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

Trampas wrote: »

As far as I know Morton's is preventing Dublin Bus from putting extra buses on the 67 route cause of the licence they have.

That is correct. Circle Line have objected to additional public funded vehicles being put onto routes 25/25A/66/66A/66B/67/67A, while at the same time have cut their own enhanced service back, with no evening or weekend service.

However, to dispel one other myth, there are no restrictions on Dublin Bus putting their new larger tri-axle buses onto the Lucan Road routes.

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 10:36am

Couldn't care less

KC61 wrote: »

That is correct. Circle Line have objected to additional public funded vehicles being put onto routes 25/25A/66/66A/66B/67/67A, while at the same time have cut their own enhanced service back, with no evening or weekend service.

That's an awful state of affairs. Are Morton's not subject to performance targets? If they are not providing the service they are stopping DB from running, DB should be allowed take it over.

MiniD · 10-01-2008 10:49am

These are the fare prices in 2002

1 - 3 stages - €0.75
4 - 7 stages - €1.05
8 - 13 stages - €1.30
Over 13 stages - €1.45

These are the fare prices in 2008

1 - 3 stages - €1.05
4 - 7 stages - €1.50
8 - 13 stages - €1.70
Over 13 stages - €2.00

In 6 years, some fares have increased by 43%. This is far above the inflation rate in the same period.

To be fair to Dublin Bus, the city has grown immensely in the last few years, with their services stretched to meet these new areas. The main problem is gridlock. If you look at the recent holiday period over Christmas and new year, it was amazing to get on a bus and actually have it flow freely through the city. Buses were on time and the timetable was perhaps even a bit too generous with some routes. This would prove that if more priority was given to buses, the company could cope rather well with their existing fleet, without throwing more buses into the rush hour traffic.

All this aside, you must question if an increase of 43% over 6 years is fair, when you consider so many people still find it hard to actually get a bus. A friend of mine lives on the Malahide Road and regularly has to let numerous buses pass by full before one stops. The 16/16A and the 39 has also got many complaints here recently.

The suggestion that Mortons is the answer for people in Celbridge and Maynooth is wrong. Regardless of which company owns the bus, it will still be stuck in the same traffic.

We've all experienced fare increases in the past, but this is the first year I have heard many people complain about the increase and the service provided. This applies to the Luas and rail increase also, where overcrowding and delays are common.

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 10:59am

Couldn't care less

MiniD wrote: »

We've all experienced fare increases in the past, but this is the first year I have heard many people complain about the increase and the service provided. This applies to the Luas and rail increase also, where overcrowding and delays are common.

I think at this point people are just fed up. We should be moving toward integration, I would be happy to pay €2 for a ticket that covered all journeys, I'm not happy to pay it for one trip. IMO the companies shouldn't get price increases every year, like private companies (I don't mean bus) they should get smarter. DB should be working on making routes more logical to encourage take up. Buses often don't go where people need to go, multiple journeys can be expensive. If the default DB ticket was valid for 90 minutes on all buses, more people would get the bus - I'm aware said ticket exists however it's not handy for people to get them in shops, the tickets sold on buses should work this way.

As long as the government allow the operators to increase fares every year with no performance targets, they have no reason to improve their services, they could spit on you as you get on and they would still get their fare increases. The whole system needs to be racially overhauled but the operators aren't going to do this, why would they? They get their increases every year for doing nothing.

markpb · 10-01-2008 11:02am

MiniD wrote: »

The main problem is gridlock. If you look at the recent holiday period over Christmas and new year, it was amazing to get on a bus and actually have it flow freely through the city. Buses were on time and the timetable was perhaps even a bit too generous with some routes. This would prove that if more priority was given to buses, the company could cope rather well with their existing fleet, without throwing more buses into the rush hour traffic.

You've hit the nail on the head there. The main problem with buses in Dublin isn't to do with the age of buses, the mood of the driver, the ineptitude of the timetabling system, it's _all_ to do with the fact that the city councils are timid and afraid of introducing any real bus priority measures. All the bus lanes in the world won't help if the junction is blocked and there's no priority there. Bus lanes in the suburbs won't help much if there's a jam in the city centre and it takes twice as long to get from Connolly to Stephens Green as it does to get from Coolock to Connolly. Maybe some day they'll discover that making bus lanes the same width as the buses (or narrower!) is a complete waste of time.

When DCC realise that buses must take priority and stop pandering to car drivers on well served trunk routes, then maybe we'll have a chance of implementing a decent bus system.

Corruptedmorals · 10-01-2008 12:38pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

KC61 wrote: »

That is correct. Circle Line have objected to additional public funded vehicles being put onto routes 25/25A/66/66A/66B/67/67A, while at the same time have cut their own enhanced service back, with no evening or weekend service.

However, to dispel one other myth, there are no restrictions on Dublin Bus putting their new larger tri-axle buses onto the Lucan Road routes.

Okay whatever about Maynooth and Celbridge routes, which Circle Line covers..it doesn't go anywhere NEAR Leixlip so how could they be allowed to curtail extra busses for it??? However it was in a local paper that more busses are being allocated to serve Chapelizod..the 66. Although the 67/A service is absolutely desperate compared to the 66/A/B which is quite good, it could still do with improvement and how can a company who DON'T COVER IT stop it?

MiniD · 10-01-2008 1:34pm

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

how can a company who DON'T COVER IT stop it?

The reason given is that part of the route is shared. I would think in this case, they mean The Lucan Road. There is a similar block from a private operator in Swords, where the new high frequency Route 141 has been delayed for months. There was also a block placed on some express Dublin Bus routes from using the Port Tunnel, even though there is no bus stops in there. When Dublin Bus put 2 unofficial extra buses onto the 25X a few months ago, they were told to remove them by the Dept. Of Transport.

It's a crazy situation where the passenger suffers every time.

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 2:00pm

Couldn't care less

One has to wonder if DB could not just take a different route? As a former Maynooth student, the drive through Lucan used to drive me mad. It added about 10 minutes on to the journey and normally picked up only one or two passengers. DB could skip Lucan altogether and go straight through. If they changed their ticketing policies slightly, integration could mean no one misses out when a route changes.

I do think it is bad that they are being held up but I'm sure there are alternatives if they bothered to explore them.

KC61 · 10-01-2008 3:04pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

Okay whatever about Maynooth and Celbridge routes, which Circle Line covers..it doesn't go anywhere NEAR Leixlip so how could they be allowed to curtail extra busses for it??? However it was in a local paper that more busses are being allocated to serve Chapelizod..the 66. Although the 67/A service is absolutely desperate compared to the 66/A/B which is quite good, it could still do with improvement and how can a company who DON'T COVER IT stop it?

This has been discussed to death here, but basically any attempt by Dublin Bus to add additional buses to ANY of the Lucan Road routes has been objected to by Circle Line, and is currently sitting in limbo whilst an EU investigation takes place.

So that means that routes 25/A, 26, 56/A/B, and 67/A are all stuck in limbo. Hence Adamstown is serviced by the 151 via Crumlin as Circle Line objected to the service operating via the Lucan QBC.

They are alleging unfair competition. Under the current regime, basically if any private operator lodges any application for a new service or amends an existing one, they can object to DB plans for a new route or enhancements to an existing route that "loosely" follows the same routing as their own service. Leixlip is served by the buses along the Lucan QBC and hence they object! Utterly daft and ridiculous, but that is the reality of the mess that we are currently finding ourselves in.

KC61 · 10-01-2008 3:07pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

paulm17781 wrote: »

One has to wonder if DB could not just take a different route? As a former Maynooth student, the drive through Lucan used to drive me mad. It added about 10 minutes on to the journey and normally picked up only one or two passengers. DB could skip Lucan altogether and go straight through. If they changed their ticketing policies slightly, integration could mean no one misses out when a route changes.

I do think it is bad that they are being held up but I'm sure there are alternatives if they bothered to explore them.

It would still be on the N4 corridor, and as a result would compete with Mortons and hence there would be an objection.

mp3guy · 10-01-2008 4:41pm

Couldn't care less

MiniD wrote: »

The suggestion that Mortons is the answer for people in Celbridge and Maynooth is wrong. Regardless of which company owns the bus, it will still be stuck in the same traffic.

That's true, but there's a difference between two buses being delayed due to traffic, and two buses just plain not showing up at all due to bad drivers/management, which is more frequent that you'd think.

shltter · 10-01-2008 6:00pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

paulm17781 wrote: »

As long as the government allow the operators to increase fares every year with no performance targets, they have no reason to improve their services, they could spit on you as you get on and they would still get their fare increases. The whole system needs to be racially overhauled but the operators aren't going to do this, why would they? They get their increases every year for doing nothing.

There are performance targets it is called a memorandum of understanding (MOU)

Included are 96% of weekday Peak time services operate as per timetable

95% of all Saturday and Sunday services operate as per timetable

It also includes issues like Scrolls answering phone calls etc

http://www.dublinbus.ie/about_us/mou_jan_june07.asp

The terms have been updated since this

shltter · 10-01-2008 6:06pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

mp3guy wrote: »

That's true, but there's a difference between two buses being delayed due to traffic, and two buses just plain not showing up at all due to bad drivers/management, which is more frequent that you'd think.

Dublin Bus have private consultants who monitor the service for them reporting

buses that did not operate, did not operate on time, rudeness etc etc

The consultants report to DB with details of fleet numbers etc etc and local management are dragged across the coals every quarter on standard levels who in turn drag drivers across the coals.

It is a common perception but your assertion is wrong all failures to operate have to be accounted for with the reason why it did not operate

shltter · 10-01-2008 6:09pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

paulm17781 wrote: »

One has to wonder if DB could not just take a different route? As a former Maynooth student, the drive through Lucan used to drive me mad. It added about 10 minutes on to the journey and normally picked up only one or two passengers. DB could skip Lucan altogether and go straight through. If they changed their ticketing policies slightly, integration could mean no one misses out when a route changes.

I do think it is bad that they are being held up but I'm sure there are alternatives if they bothered to explore them.

If only it was that simple any changes to timetable even just changes of departure times have to be approved by the DOT and are delayed due to private operator objections

Public transport in this city is being held to ransom by private companies more interested in lining their pockets than the hardship of the travelling public

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 6:19pm

Couldn't care less

shltter wrote: »

Public transport in this city is being held to ransom by private companies more interested in lining their pockets than the hardship of the travelling public

A private company trying to make money... How dare they.

That said, our Government really need to do something about this. If someone applies for a route they should get it unless it is over served, where oh where is the DTA we've heard about for years?

shltter wrote: »

There are performance targets it is called a memorandum of understanding (MOU)

Included are 96% of weekday Peak time services operate as per timetable

95% of all Saturday and Sunday services operate as per timetable

That's just providing the service they are expected to provide. I should have been clearer in my original post. I meant they should have targets like increased ridership by X% per year, if met then a fare increase for more investment etc. If they said "bus ridership was up by X% this year and we can do another X% next year if we get Y new buses and a fare increase, then they deserve it.

shltter · 10-01-2008 6:25pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

paulm17781 wrote: »

A private company trying to make money... How dare they.

That said, our Government really need to do something about this. If someone applies for a route they should get it unless it is over served, where oh where is the DTA we've heard about for years?

If you want Public transport to be about profit then it is service that will suffer

I disagree if someone applies for a route they should be able to prove that they can provide a service not just a cherry picking service at peak times, not a service that prohibits the disabled from traveling etc etc

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 6:29pm

Couldn't care less

shltter wrote: »

I disagree if someone applies for a route they should be able to prove that they can provide a service not just a cherry picking service at peak times, not a service that prohibits the disabled from traveling etc etc

That's what I meant. I shouldn't get a route because I apply, if I apply and promise a good service I should get it and lose it if service isn't being provided, same goes for DB.

Even if there are private operators on a route DB should be allowed to compete, this would make our city easier to get around and I think the variances in the routes that would emerge would really benefit the public.

John R · 10-01-2008 6:33pm

Pigman II wrote: »

The fare that costs €1.50 in 2008 cost just €1.05 in 2002.

Dublin Bus pays approx €1.15 per litre for diesel in 2008.
In 2002 they paid approx 40c.
An almost 300% rise in 6 years.

shltter · 10-01-2008 6:36pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

paulm17781 wrote: »

That's just providing the service they are expected to provide. I should have been clearer in my original post. I meant they should have targets like increased ridership by X% per year, if met then a fare increase for more investment etc. Giving them a rise because they ask for it and provide the service they are expected to do is like giving me a rise for going to work every day as opposed to earning a rise for contributing.

That is not what you said and not what you meant here

paulm17781 wrote: »

As long as the government allow the operators to increase fares every year with no performance targets, they have no reason to improve their services, they could spit on you as you get on and they would still get their fare increases

You said performance targets and that is what they are the targets are renegotiated every year and the targets for 2008 are much higher than those in the link I provided.
What you said is clearly wrong and I have pointed that out so you are attempting to move the goalposts.

But as a matter of interest Dublin Bus has increased its ridership every year since 2001 except for 2005 when the LUAS started for obvious reasons. And the consultants that the Government hired to look at Public Transport reported that Dublin Bus gave the Government good value for the money spent by the government on DB.

And undoubtedly if the DOT untied the shackles and allowed DB to operate then it would provide even better value and carry even more people but at the moment DB is operating with both hands tied behind its back.

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 6:46pm

Couldn't care less

shltter wrote: »

That is not what you said and not what you meant here

You said performance targets and that is what they are the targets are renegotiated every year and the targets for 2008 are much higher than those in the link I provided.
What you said is clearly wrong and I have pointed that out so you are attempting to move the goalposts.

Sorry, I forgot you know more about what I meant to say than I do. :rolleyes:

Now, relax, you're getting tense. Deep breath, release, all better.

I said with no "targets" by targets I meant improvements. I phrased it wrong. I'm sorry if this upset you. I don't consider providing the service you are there to provide a target. A target should be an achievement. Yes they have increased ridership, the population of Dublin has also increased and more people are driving. They have not been set a target rider increase by the government and IMO don't deserve a fare increase.

I don't know why all the DB lads here get so aggressive when the service is challenged. The point I'm trying to make is that DB could and should provide a better service. FWIW, I wish they would, that's why I post here.

shltter · 10-01-2008 7:34pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

paulm17781 wrote: »

Sorry, I forgot you know more about what I meant to say than I do. :rolleyes:

Now, relax, you're getting tense. Deep breath, release, all better.

I said with no "targets" by targets I meant improvements. I phrased it wrong. I'm sorry if this upset you. I don't consider providing the service you are there to provide a target. A target should be an achievement. Yes they have increased ridership, the population of Dublin has also increased and more people are driving. They have not been set a target rider increase by the government and IMO don't deserve a fare increase.

I don't know why all the DB lads here get so aggressive when the service is challenged. The point I'm trying to make is that DB could and should provide a better service. FWIW, I wish they would, that's why I post here.

You said they could spit on you that does not indicate you meant improvements it indicates you meant performance.

You clearly did not know about the MOU and when pointed out you embarrassingly tried to wriggle out of it.

It is up to the Government to set the targets Dublin Bus has met all the targets that the Government has set but you think they should have an increase withheld because they have not met a target that has not been set.

That is some logic

Colonel Sanders · 10-01-2008 7:46pm

Couldn't care less

John R wrote: »

Dublin Bus pays approx €1.15 per litre for diesel in 2008.
In 2002 they paid approx 40c.
An almost 300% rise in 6 years.

are buses run on diesel? If so could the rules be 'bended' allowing them to use green diesel?

btw the day before the euro came in my local service station was charging 65p (=82.5c) for a litre. Drove past the same place last night and the price was 122c. Not a 300% rise. if they were getting 'special' prices back then why aren't they now?

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 8:02pm

Couldn't care less

shltter wrote: »

You said they could spit on you that does not indicate you meant improvements it indicates you meant performance.

You clearly did not know about the MOU and when pointed out you embarrassingly tried to wriggle out of it.

Shhh, you haven't been doing your breathing exercises, you're going to get high blood pressure. Relax, it's ok. Now, I didn't know about the MOU, however that wasn't the point I was trying to make. My point is that they have done nothing to merit the increase. Please don't say about the MOU again, that isn't an achievement, that is what DB are there for. My point about spitting meant DB can spit on you, not the drivers. You're right though, I am so embarrassed, you know me too well. I'm actually getting facial plastic surgery as I am so mortified I don't want to be recognized by anyone here who knows me in person. I can't believe I did that. Imagine, saying something, on a message board, that was open to misinterpretation, having it misinterpreted then admitting you were wrong and trying to clarify your point. I'll cry myself to sleep tonight, what a fool I've been. No honestly, I'm mortified, really. I might even emigrate, just to be safe. I'll never try to correct a point i made badly made again, thanks for showing me the error of my ways. Man I'm embarrassed.

shltter wrote: »

It is up to the Government to set the targets Dublin Bus has met all the targets that the Government has set but you think they should have an increase withheld because they have not met a target that has not been set.

That is some logic

Oh look, what I wrote was misinterpreted again, I'm mortified, I don't think I'll ever get over today. What I meant to say was: They have done nothing to merit an increase so they shouldn't get one unless they can state expected service improvement that will come about directly as a result of this. Currently they get their increase for being on time, that's not worthy of a fare increase. If we, the public are to pay more for the service, we should be seeing improvements for our money. Prices have risen 43% since 2001, the service has not gotten 143% better. To justify and increase, there should be a reason. These should be set by the government and DB should have to meet these, being on time is not a target.

You're taking this very personally, maybe you should have a kit-kat. People here say the fare increases aren't merited and I said how I think the service should be run which gives a mechanism for justifying the increase but you're acting like you are being attacked.

shltter · 10-01-2008 8:41pm

No, it's not worth it. Spending too much as it is

paulm17781 wrote: »

Shhh, you haven't been doing your breathing exercises, you're going to get high blood pressure. Relax, it's ok. Now, I didn't know about the MOU, however that wasn't the point I was trying to make. My point is that they have done nothing to merit the increase. Please don't say about the MOU again, that isn't an achievement, that is what DB are there for. My point about spitting meant DB can spit on you, not the drivers. You're right though, I am so embarrassed, you know me too well. I'm actually getting facial plastic surgery as I am so mortified I don't want to be recognized by anyone here who knows me in person. I can't believe I did that. Imagine, saying something, on a message board, that was open to misinterpretation, having it misinterpreted then admitting you were wrong and trying to clarify your point. I'll cry myself to sleep tonight, what a fool I've been. No honestly, I'm mortified, really. I might even emigrate, just to be safe. I'll never try to correct a point i made badly made again, thanks for showing me the error of my ways. Man I'm embarrassed.

Oh look, what I wrote was misinterpreted again, I'm mortified, I don't think I'll ever get over today. What I meant to say was: They have done nothing to merit an increase so they shouldn't get one unless they can state expected service improvement that will come about directly as a result of this. Currently they get their increase for being on time, that's not worthy of a fare increase. If we, the public are to pay more for the service, we should be seeing improvements for our money. Prices have risen 43% since 2001, the service has not gotten 143% better. To justify and increase, there should be a reason. These should be set by the government and DB should have to meet these, being on time is not a target.

You're taking this very personally, maybe you should have a kit-kat. People here say the fare increases aren't merited and I said how I think the service should be run which gives a mechanism for justifying the increase but you're acting like you are being attacked.

No I am pointing out the mistakes you are making and I am far from getting annoyed by your errors.

And I did not mean you were embarrassed I would not expect you to be rather it is embarrassing watching you wriggle and try to rile me by continually telling me to relax

Look you are missing the big picture here the increase is needed because the Government have decided to only give 1.5 million increase in the subsidy which nowhere near meets the increased costs the company has to meet to continue providing the same level of service.

This is not a reward for DB being a good boy this is stealth charges by the government getting the public to pay for what the Government should be paying for.

This is to make up for the shortfall in the Public service obligation payment the government gives Dublin Bus for providing public services and even at that it will not meet half the increase in costs.

Without increased investment there will not be increased services and there is no increase in investment.

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 9:03pm

Couldn't care less

shltter wrote: »

No I am pointing out the mistakes you are making and I am far from getting annoyed by your errors.

And I did not mean you were embarrassed I would not expect you to be rather it is embarrassing watching you wriggle and try to rile me by continually telling me to relax

Your tone has calmed, that's good, I was getting worried about you. No need to get so angry is there? Your tone was very aggressive, there is no need for that, you really should relax. Wriggle? you're right, I'm wriggling, I'm actually closer to vibrating. I freely admitted I phrased it wrong. Trying to wriggle out of it alright. I'm so happy you know me so well.

shltter wrote: »

Look you are missing the big picture here the increase is needed because the Government have decided to only give 1.5 million increase in the subsidy which nowhere near meets the increased costs the company has to meet to continue providing the same level of service.

I have always said that the whole CIE group should get higher subsidy and reduce fares. IIRC we have the lowest public transport subsidy in Europe.

shltter wrote: »

This is not a reward for DB being a good boy this is stealth charges by the government getting the public to pay for what the Government should be paying for.

This is to make up for the shortfall in the Public service obligation payment the government gives Dublin Bus for providing public services and even at that it will not meet half the increase in costs.

Without increased investment there will not be increased services and there is no increase in investment.

Why do the government have to do this for nothing? Why are DB (I think the same for RTE with the license fee increase) not forced to be better. DB does little to innovate, in other threads I have suggested ways they could increase ridership. As it is they are getting less money than they need. They should however be more intuitive and doing something to increase ridership and trying to generate additional revenue, this would be possible with better practices and smarter use of existing routes. I have seen little change in DB in my life (though they have improved a bit in the last year) yet they get continual fare raises and do nothing in turn unless it is handed to them (QBCs). If the company I work for had a bad year, the government wouldn't just give us money, we would have to improve our working practices. I guarantee if DB tried, they could make huge improvements and increase revenue but they don't bother as they government will always give them the fare increases, this is what the public find unacceptable.

Ham'nd'egger · 10-01-2008 9:17pm

paulm17781 wrote: »

Your tone has calmed, that's good, I was getting worried about you. No need to get so angry is there? Your tone was very aggressive, there is no need for that, you really should relax. Wriggle? you're right, I'm wriggling, I'm actually closer to vibrating. I freely admitted I phrased it wrong. Trying to wriggle out of it alright. I'm so happy you know me so well.

I have always said that the whole CIE group should get higher subsidy and reduce fares. IIRC we have the lowest public transport subsidy in Europe.

Why do the government have to do this for nothing? Why are DB (I think the same for RTE with the license fee increase) not forced to be better. DB does little to innovate, in other threads I have suggested ways they could increase ridership. As it is they are getting less money than they need. They should however be more intuitive and doing something to increase ridership and trying to generate additional revenue, this would be possible with better practices and smarter use of existing routes. I have seen little change in DB in my life (though they have improved a bit in the last year) yet they get continual fare raises and do nothing in turn unless it is handed to them (QBCs). If the company I work for had a bad year, the government wouldn't just give us money, we would have to improve our working practices. I guarantee if DB tried, they could make huge improvements and increase revenue but they don't bother as they government will always give them the fare increases, this is what the public find unacceptable.

:rolleyes:

John R · 10-01-2008 9:17pm

Colonel Sanders wrote: »

are buses run on diesel? If so could the rules be 'bended' allowing them to use green diesel?

btw the day before the euro came in my local service station was charging 65p (=82.5c) for a litre. Drove past the same place last night and the price was 122c. Not a 300% rise. if they were getting 'special' prices back then why aren't they now?

Until January 1 2008 ALL bus operators could avail of a nominal rate of fuel duty, that has now been abolished so they are now paying the full rate.

The reason given for abolishing this tax relief was the Irish government being forced to apply EU rules aimed at reducing carbon emissions. The stupidity of supposedly reducing pollution by making public transport more expensive I'll leave others to ponder on.

According to the AA average price of diesel in 2002 was 32c before Duty and VAT, average pump price was 75c.

Including VAT and the nominal duty the price to bus operators would have been below 40c.

Considering that even without including record oil price rises the fuel costs to bus operators have increased overnight by around 40% the fact that the fares have only risen by 5-10% this year is surprising.

Dublin Bus and I expect many others are going to have serious problems operating the same levels of service this year in this climate. They are already taking steps to reduce costs by altering bus allocations. The 2 year old VT class tri-axle buses used on the 46A route are now only being used Mon-Fri as they are particularly heavy on fuel (and tyres). To save money at the weekends they are using smaller AV class buses that are not required on other routes.

paulm17781 · 10-01-2008 9:19pm

Couldn't care less

John R wrote: »

Until January 1 2008 ALL bus operators could avail of a nominal rate of fuel duty, that has now been abolished so they are now paying the full rate.

The reason given for abolishing this tax relief was the Irish government being forced to apply EU rules aimed at reducing carbon emissions. The stupidity of supposedly reducing pollution by making public transport more expensive I'll leave others to ponder on.

That's actually very interesting. I had no idea about that. It really is a nonsense law to bring in. Do truckers etc. still get reduced fuel rate?

Dublin bus price increase

Comments