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

European Commission Putting Pressure on Goverment to Tender Rail Services

Options
245

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    devnull wrote: »
    Rolling stock orders and allocation is controlled by the UK department of transport in that country, it is not under the control of the individual operators which is largely the reason that overcrowding is a problem on the network,

    There has been farcical situations where companies have wanted to order x amounts of carriages, but the government have decided that is too many and cut the order, then a year or two later, ask the same operator to explain why their services are overcrowded and to do something about it.

    Also in a lot of cases, for the bigger train deals, the government has fully managed the tender, which means that orders have took approx 5 years from initial publication of tender to an order being actually placed for the rolling stock, due to government bureaucracy.
    i agree. however lets not pretend there aren't operators who at the same time wouldn't bother ordering stock even if it was left to them. the DFT have issues and a lot to answer to i'd agree.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #33
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Icepick wrote: »
    Total opposite in fact

    what and how. all the privatization of the UK railway did was deliver stuff BR were planning to deliver 30 years ago. and even at that there is a long way to go. BR had faults and a lot of them but at least they did think of the future (all though they needed to think of the day to day stuff more as well) .

    in relation to this tendering, so far, nobody is convincing me that in irelands case "shur itl be different this time"

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #34
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,586 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    end of the road wrote: »
    i agree. however lets not pretend there aren't operators who at the same time wouldn't bother ordering stock even if it was left to them. the DFT have issues and a lot to answer to i'd agree.

    I agree that there have been some operators that have run operations into the ground with cost cutting going to the extreme, but not all of the operators are like that.

    Go look at the Thameslink rolling stock tender history that the DFT managed that is now over 4 years behind schedule. Procurement begun in April 2008 and the stock was supposed to be delivered by 2012, here is what actually happened.

    July 2008 - Shortlisted Bidders
    June 2011 - Prefered Bidder Announced
    June 2013 - Contract Signed
    2016-2018 - Entering Service

    If you wonder why Thameslink is totally overcrowded, there is your answer.


  • Options
    #35
    Nermal
    Registered Users Posts: 2,614 ✭✭✭Nermal


    end of the road wrote: »
    i'm just not seeing any advantage.

    Getting rid of the bolshie staff is the main advantage, which results in plenty of consequent benefits for consumers.


  • Options
    #36
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Nermal wrote: »
    Getting rid of the bolshie staff is the main advantage, which results in plenty of consequent benefits for consumers.
    such staff barely exist these days. both privatization and tendering don't get rid of the odd bad apple. so again, still seeing no point to this i'm afraid

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,586 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    I don't think there are that many bad ones, there are a few bad apples but nothing more than that. There just are a lot of staff who do simply okay, no better no worse.

    There are some good staff in Irish Rail, far too few of them though but when you do come across one it generally makes them stand out from the vast majority.

    A case in point being a woman who does announcements at Connolly the last few months, the quality and clarity of her announcements are VASTLY superior and more professional than the guys who often sound like they are just speaking to their mates.


  • Options
    #38
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    end of the road wrote: »
    such staff barely exist these days. both privatization and tendering don't get rid of the odd bad apple. so again, still seeing no point to this i'm afraid

    It's very unlikely Irish Rail is the best company available to run railway services. There are other companies with vastly more experience, who can provide a better service.


  • Options
    #39
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    n97 mini wrote: »
    It's very unlikely Irish Rail is the best company available to run railway services. There are other companies with vastly more experience, who can provide a better service.
    vastly more experience? what "better" service can these companies provide? taking it that the NTA will be deciding everything down to a t? the NTA could sort out any issues to do with services with IE tomorrow if it wanted to. so looking at our friends in the UK, where "must do better" is still the case in my experience, i'm wondering how will it be different this time just because its ireland?

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #40
    crushproof
    Registered Users Posts: 2,719 ✭✭✭crushproof


    If you've ever lived in the north of England and commuted daily on the third world Pacers you'd realise that privatisation doesn't work. Look at the East Coast line, massively successful under public ownership. The rise in passenger numbers has nothing do with privatisation, it was inevitably going happen.
    Also the fact that state owned railway operators from Europe run many UK lines shows how much of a farce it is.


  • Options
    #41
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    end of the road wrote: »
    what "better" service can these companies provide?
    Think of all those areas that Irish Rail is poor at:
    1. Information announcements
    2. Cleanliness of trains
    3. Seating reservation system that works
    4. Enforcement of seating reservations
    5. General customer service
    6. Train connections
    7. Hours of service (early morning/late night)

    They're just a few from the customer's perspective. I'm sure from an operations side they have room for improvement too


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,667 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Think of all those areas that Irish Rail is poor at:
    1. Information announcements
    2. Cleanliness of trains
    3. Seating reservation system that works
    4. Enforcement of seating reservations
    5. General customer service
    6. Train connections
    7. Hours of service (early morning/late night)

    They're just a few from the customer's perspective. I'm sure from an operations side they have room for improvement too

    1 - Possible but unlikely
    2 - They will contract clearnes to lowest bidders so nothing much will change
    3 - They will be using the 22 fleet so what IE can't provide they won't either
    4 - +1
    5 - +1
    6 - To IE network?, would likely require agreement which IE don't have to give or make timetable difficult to meet connections
    7 - That won't be covered by the PSO so it won't be commercially viable, IE would offer it was part of PSO


  • Options
    #43
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Think of all those areas that Irish Rail is poor at:
    1. Information announcements
    2. Cleanliness of trains
    3. Seating reservation system that works
    4. Enforcement of seating reservations
    5. General customer service
    6. Train connections
    7. Hours of service (early morning/late night)

    They're just a few from the customer's perspective. I'm sure from an operations side they have room for improvement too


    none of which need tendering to make happen and enforce. the NTA could deal with those issues today.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #44
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    Why haven't they then?
    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    1 - Possible but unlikely
    2 - They will contract clearnes to lowest bidders so nothing much will change
    3 - They will be using the 22 fleet so what IE can't provide they won't either
    4 - +1
    5 - +1
    6 - To IE network?, would likely require agreement which IE don't have to give or make timetable difficult to meet connections
    7 - That won't be covered by the PSO so it won't be commercially viable, IE would offer it was part of PSO

    2. A proper tendering system would mean the lowest bidder that does the job right
    3. That's my line of work and I bet in 2 weeks I could have that system working
    6. IE can't make their own trains connect with anything, other trains, buses, ferries. So *anyone* could do a better job.
    7. TBC


  • Options
    #45
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,586 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    crushproof wrote: »
    If you've ever lived in the north of England and commuted daily on the third world Pacers

    The PRIVATE COMPANIES in the areas that are served by pacers got together with the DFT and agreed that an order for 202 DMU vehicles to help replace the pacers and to inject some much required modern diesel stock into the network would help vastly improve the quality of service on non electrified lines.

    Unfortunately the STATE RUN department for transport decided that with electrification projects taking place over the next 10 years, that they would not be a wise investment, and decided to cancel the order so Northern Rail, Transpennine Express and First Great Western lost out so there is nothing they can do.

    The problem with rolling stock allocation in the UK and numbers and overcrowding, is not down to privatisation, but is down to far too much interference from state run bodies, so even if you did nationalise everything tomorrow it won't fix the problem, because the problem with rolling stock is related to too much state involvement, not too little.

    If you think that rolling stock procurement is slow and doesn't serve the passengers needs when they micro-manage the operators orders, go look at how long it took them when the operators were not involved at all with Thameslink and the Intercity Express Programme which are both now running over 5 years behind.


  • Options
    #46
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Why haven't they then?

    why don't you ask them?
    n97 mini wrote: »
    2. A proper tendering system would mean the lowest bidder that does the job right

    will you get anyone willing to do it for the current subsidy apart from irish rail?
    n97 mini wrote: »
    3. That's my line of work and I bet in 2 weeks I could have that system working

    offer your services then
    n97 mini wrote: »
    6. IE can't make their own trains connect with anything, other trains, buses, ferries. So *anyone* could do a better job.

    how.
    n97 mini wrote: »
    7. TBC

    oh i'd say "probably all ready confirmed" . confirmed as "not going to happen" unless the NTA and government are willing to fund them.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #47
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    devnull wrote: »
    The PRIVATE COMPANIES in the areas that are served by pacers got together with the DFT and agreed that an order for 202 DMU vehicles to help replace the pacers and to inject some much required modern diesel stock into the network would help vastly improve the quality of service on non electrified lines.

    Unfortunately the STATE RUN department for transport decided that with electrification projects taking place over the next 10 years, that they would not be a wise investment, and decided to cancel the order so Northern Rail, Transpennine Express and First Great Western lost out so there is nothing they can do.

    The problem with rolling stock allocation in the UK and numbers and overcrowding, is not down to privatisation, but is down to far too much interference from state run bodies, so even if you did nationalise everything tomorrow it won't fix the problem, because the problem with rolling stock is related to too much state involvement, not too little.

    If you think that rolling stock procurement is slow and doesn't serve the passengers needs when they micro-manage the operators orders, go look at how long it took them when the operators were not involved at all with Thameslink and the Intercity Express Programme which are both now running over 5 years behind.

    but who funds the passenger rolling stock? the government gives the money to the roscos who in turn buy the stock and lease it back to the operators, who will in a number of cases get government subsidies part of which will go on the lease of the stock. its not private operators or privatization that is mostly funding anything, its the government. freight on the other hand is completely different. either way, its not a system which should be replicated apart from the investment in the infrastructure, which sadly had to take railtracks existence before it would happen.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #48
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,667 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Why haven't they then?



    2. A proper tendering system would mean the lowest bidder that does the job right
    3. That's my line of work and I bet in 2 weeks I could have that system working
    6. IE can't make their own trains connect with anything, other trains, buses, ferries. So *anyone* could do a better job.
    7. TBC

    2 - But would it really, surly the IE employee's deal will get more less what DB deal for moving to private operators? We know if they don't what will happen...
    3 - I'm sure is fixable but if IE say it's the 3/4G coverage/WIFI then not a lot new operators can do
    6 - Come on they have made a real improvement in this area, always room for more. There draft timetable out towards November/December will be interesting. It not as easy as people expect with mostly single track and all routes going along two routes into Dublin.
    7 - TBC - Indeed I'm sure the IE would run late night Fri/Sat if it was included.


  • Options
    #49
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,586 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    end of the road wrote: »
    but who funds the passenger rolling stock? the government gives the money to the roscos who in turn buy the stock and lease it back to the operators, who will in a number of cases get government subsidies part of which will go on the lease of the stock.

    That is what I am saying.

    While there is private operators running the lines, the rolling stock element of the system is by and large dictated by the Department for Transport, with the ROSCO's generally having the next amount of influence on this area and the actual operators being behind both of them.

    The point is, even if the private operators were bought out tomorrow, none of the problems with rolling stock would be solved. In fact, the only difference would be that the Department for Transport and ROSCOs would have even more control, and history has shown that private operators are more ambitious when it comes to growth and capacity than the government.

    This is the whole reason overcrowding exists in the UK rail network to the degree it does, because what the operators predict passenger wise is generally far more than the Department for Transport does and history has shown that generally the operators prediction is generally closer to reality and more long term than the very pessimistic and short term thinking of the department.

    There's already been an inquiry launched in the UK due to the delay of the stock orders for Thameslink and the Intercity Express order, about how the Department of Transport were considered out of their depth by going it alone.


  • Options
    #50
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Think of all those areas that Irish Rail is poor at:
    1. Information announcements
    2. Cleanliness of trains
    3. Seating reservation system that works
    4. Enforcement of seating reservations
    5. General customer service
    6. Train connections
    7. Hours of service (early morning/late night)

    They're just a few from the customer's perspective. I'm sure from an operations side they have room for improvement too

    These are really minor issues and hold no reason for privatisation. Most of these problem are from a lack of funding.


  • Options
    #51
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    IE 222 wrote: »
    These are really minor issues and hold no reason for privatisation. Most of these problem are from a lack of funding.
    thats my point. the NTA could deal with all these issues today if they wanted to. the only reason i can think for tendering is it gives the government a scapegote to blame for any issues. overcrowding on trains? sorry nothing we can do its the operators fault, even though the NTA and government call the shots and fund. overcrowding down on trains? oh look privatization is a great success, or maybe the government will take the credit? not sure. maybe living in this country all my life is making me more cynical by the day, but i'd suspect not TBH. but who knows

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Hungerford
    Registered Users Posts: 912 ✭✭✭Hungerford


    There's been some interesting posts on the Rail Users Ireland forum about this, which raises some concerns about how it might pan out if the EU get their way. RUI claim that there is no chance that IÉ will be allowed to keep their contract due to poor operational standards.

    It appears that the network will be split into four chunks: Belfast-Dublin; DART; Connolly-based routes; Everything else. The suggestion is that Belfast-Dublin will be left with IÉ/Translink for political reasons. This prospect raises the question of whether the ticket madness seen in the UK might raise its head here.

    In addition, the suggestion seems to be that the applicants for the tenders will be the usual suspects from the UK, including the nationalised railways of France and Germany.


  • Options
    #53
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,667 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Hungerford wrote: »
    There's been some interesting posts on the Rail Users Ireland forum about this, which raises some concerns about how it might pan out if the EU get their way. RUI claim that there is no chance that IÉ will be allowed to keep their contract due to poor operational standards.

    It appears that the network will be split into four chunks: Belfast-Dublin; DART; Connolly-based routes; Everything else. The suggestion is that Belfast-Dublin will be left with IÉ/Translink for political reasons. This prospect raises the question of whether the ticket madness seen in the UK might raise its head here.

    In addition, the suggestion seems to be that the applicants for the tenders will be the usual suspects from the UK, including the nationalised railways of France and Germany.

    Indeed there is however there is always the possible funding gap with the free travel scheme. They have a nice little agreement in place but that won't be sustainable if the network is broken up. One of the main reasons I see the taxpayer saving very little if anything..
    thats my point. the NTA could deal with all these issues today if they wanted to. the only reason i can think for tendering is it gives the government a scapegote to blame for any issues. overcrowding on trains? sorry nothing we can do its the operators fault, even though the NTA and government call the shots and fund. overcrowding down on trains? oh look privatization is a great success, or maybe the government will take the credit? not sure. maybe living in this country all my life is making me more cynical by the day, but i'd suspect not TBH. but who knows

    They can but would likely have to wait until PSO is renewed if IE were to not play ball.


  • Options
    #54
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    end of the road wrote: »
    why don't you ask them?
    You made the original claim, without providing any evidence. You ask them!


  • Options
    #55
    Banjoxed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,844 ✭✭✭Banjoxed


    n97 mini wrote: »
    You made the original claim, without providing any evidence. You ask them!

    Ah C&T - the L&H Soc of Irish transport :/


  • Options
    #56
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    n97 mini wrote: »
    You made the original claim, without providing any evidence. You ask them!
    no, i won't. i've actual important things to do. as its you who wants to know why they aren't doing it, you ask them. evidence for what. as they are the national transport authority, sorting out transport issues is their job. unless things have changed.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #57
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    end of the road wrote: »
    no, i won't. i've actual important things to do.
    :D


  • Options
    #58
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    n97 mini wrote: »

    i agree, you would be better contacting them yourself for an answer

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #59
    newacc2015
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭newacc2015


    I cant see a private company tendering for this unless, they can get rid of CIE staff. You will struggle to find a company, that has had any positive experiences with a semi-state company employees or taking over public sectors firms. Greyhound had horrific experiences with former DCC employees. Eg absenteeism of 25%, refusing to work more than 30 hour weeks, despite being overpaid. In the end greyhound gave nearly all of them redundancy, due to their high cost and lack of work ethic


  • Options
    #60
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    newacc2015 wrote: »
    I cant see a private company tendering for this unless, they can get rid of CIE staff.

    if they want it badly they will tender. there aren't hundreds of qualified railway staff out there waiting in the wings. and training takes time. read about the UK system to get an understanding of how it all works.
    newacc2015 wrote: »
    You will struggle to find a company, that has had any positive experiences with a semi-state company employees or taking over public sectors firms.

    yes because semi-state employees don't bend over when told to, and allow their conditions and rights to be eroded. they stand and fight for what they earned.
    newacc2015 wrote: »
    Greyhound had horrific experiences with former DCC employees. Eg absenteeism of 25%, refusing to work more than 30 hour weeks, despite being overpaid. In the end greyhound gave nearly all of them redundancy, due to their high cost and lack of work ethic

    they had great experiences. the staff weren't overpayed. the staff had great work ethic dispite their treatment. the 30 hour week was in their original contract and they were right not to give it up. they were to good for that company anyway so they were right to take what they could get and leave. shame they didn't bankrupt it but at least hopefully they are happy with what they got in their redundantsy.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,667 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    http://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/irish-rail-faces-bankruptcy-if-it-loses-tender-government-warns-1.2305992
    The Government fears such a development could leave it having to repay more than €150 million in debts owed by Iarnród Éireann.

    It is understood there are also fears that rolling stock worth millions of euro could end up in the hands of a receiver in the event of the State company going bankrupt.

    A private operator would want to deliver significant savings to off set that 150 million debit :rolleyes:


Advertisement