Is P11 anti public transport

maladroit · 13-08-2006 7:06am #1

Interesting to note that P11 is anti-public transport.

If anyone is guilty of "biased" reporting here it is you.

As if you don't know perfectly well that all these issues will come up for consideration when the railway order is under consideration.

Maladroit.

SeanW · 13-08-2006 7:51am

Umm ... Platform 11 isn't against public transport, it's against wasting money on railway projects that won't do what railways are supposed to do - serve lots and lots of people and/or goods.

Railways are an effective tool for large movements. Nothing more, nothing less. They don't work for every crackpot priest demanding that a tramway through the middle of nowhere be reinstated because, just because, with a vague reference to "social justice" or some whacko on Irish Railway News who wants to get the line going 'because I'd love to see GM loco number 124 hauling liners over the Swinford viaduct' or whatever.

Passenger railways DO work when they can move large numbers of people over considerable distances at speed and in comfort.

None of this applies to the Western Rail 'Corridor'. Because the alignment is a cheapo pile of junk that never was much good in the firstplace and the area it serves is usually low density development and one-off housing blight. P11 opposes the Northern section of the WRC because it's fundamentally stupid.

You saying P11 is anti-public transport is like someone saying the Greens were anti-environment if they opposed wasting a huge amount of money on a massive solar power plant in Siberia or a wind farm underground or something incredibly stupid like that.

popebenny16 · 13-08-2006 11:32pm

Interesting to note that P11 is anti-public transport

Could you please take an hour or so to have a look at our website, do a cut and paste job and come back here with some evidence to back that up?

That would be nice.

Thanks.

Ham'nd'egger · 14-08-2006 8:33pm

popebenny16 wrote:

Could you please take an hour or so to have a look at our website, do a cut and paste job and come back here with some evidence to back that up?

That would be nice.

Thanks.

To be fair to the poster, while Platform are very much pro public transport, the odd pro P 11 supporter does advocate private operation of railways. Maybe he is getting the wrong end of the stick here, that's all.

Back on topic, rail regulations will specify specific places and circumstances whereby the horn must be blown by the driver.

popebenny16 · 15-08-2006 2:58am

Yes, I can see where you are dcoming from.

But the question remains.

Maladroit. Put up or shut up.

popebenny16 · 16-08-2006 1:21pm

Maladroit. Put up or shut up.

I'd just like to apoligise for that, it was rude. I have said before that what either myself of other members of P11 say on any internet chatboard, including our own, are our personal opinions and the official position is on the main pages of the website.

Regarding public -v- private ownership.... very thorny and emotive issue. LUAS looks a good mix of it though.

maladroit · 21-08-2006 11:01am

popebenny16 wrote:

I'd just like to apoligise for that, it was rude. .

Thanks for that, and no worries, it came across to me as a spirited defence, not a mean one!

My own apologies for not replying sooner, I tend to travel a lot, and I don't always get the opportunity to drop in on Boards as often as I would like.

I'm familiar with the P11 website and concept, but what I was commenting on in my (admittedly snappish) post was the manner in which the debate was entered into on this particular thread.

Specifically, given the amount of detailed experience and info that the P11 team has with the processes involved in putting rail infrastructure into place ( or reviving old infrastructure), it would be known that all of the issues raised by the OP would have to be debated in the public arena, and all interested parties would have the chance to have their say on noise or other issues. It's not as if the thing could simply steamroll through and start (re)construction with no permissions.

To just agree with OP because it fit P11s own POV on the WRC, while ignoring their knowledge of all of the processes that must be gone through to get the scheme operational, seemed, in my opinion, to display bias, and play into the hands of the anti-public transport bandwagon.

Just my opinion.

Maladroit.

Hobart · 21-08-2006 11:19am

Moved from other thread.

Chris_533976 · 21-08-2006 11:44am

I predict this thread will be locked

Winters · 21-08-2006 12:42pm

Is Maladroit just anti P11?

popebenny16 · 21-08-2006 1:47pm

I dont think so, in fact he has raised a valid enough point. We're not, for the record, anti-public transport. We're are in fact very much pro public transport, ie we're pro moving as many people as possible by mass-transport means where possible. I think a mod may have split a part of another thread and created this one. Maladriots post (first one here) was ain reply to one of DerekP11 in what is now another thread.

Well, state owned transport, public owned transport, a mixture of the two? Who honestly cares that much, apart form the vested interests? The only vested interests that P11 are interested in are the passengers.

Hobart · 21-08-2006 2:17pm

I've split the thread out from the other thread. As long as there is no crap, such as above which was apologised for, the thread could actually be interesting.

Slice · 21-08-2006 3:15pm

What I don't understand is that P11 were originally opposed to Metro North but now are in favour of it - what's that about? And I'm not referring to the views of P11 members on Boards but actual press coverage of the P11 position on Metro North.

MarkoP11 · 21-08-2006 3:52pm

On March 18th 2005 the position was outlined as follows and noting here for the record that the RPA where asked 1 month before to respond to the issues, that history now

1) The stated capacity of 18,000 was not sufficient
2) The proposal did not serve Swords
3) No provision was made for later expansion, eg orbital metro
4) No provision for integration with Maynooth line or Red Luas
5) Demand estimates did not account for future growth
6) Cost was extremely excessive given other options
7) It would have no impact on the core congestion problem approaching the M50 ring

Following the publication of Transport 21 and further clarification on Metro the RPA where happy to confirm the following

Capacity is now inexcess 30k
A connection will be provided Maynooth line and Red Luas
Swords is go
Orbital metro is go

As a result given the go ahead had been sanctioned the finance aspect must be ignored and the significant specification changes clearly nullified the concerned

As is typical independent newspapers can't read the press release and starting quoting us as metro would be a white elephant strange that since its not to be found in the press release, http://www.platform11.org/media/press_release.php?year=2005&no=pr_038.html they ignored a request to clarrify the matter and well solictors are expensive

In the back of the report was

• Legal measures to allow 24 hour tunnelling should be in place before work begins (possible)
• The Metro should start at St. Stephen’s Green and terminate at Swords not Dublin Airport (agreed)
• A Metro station should be provided at Glasnevin Junction (Phibsborough) (Drumcondra deemed better after discussion now RPA preferred route)
• The Metro should be built to the same specification as the DART system (Luas system compat provided)
• Metro stations should be built to accommodate 6 car trains not 3 car as proposed (agreed)
• The RPA should acknowledge that Metro is not a standalone pro ject and should be designed to maximise integration with other public transport projects (agreed)
• The Metro must comply with all current and proposed Irish and EU legislation as well as following best international practice (agreed)
• Stations should be built to the highest specification to ensure efficient and safe operation (agreed)
• A separate body independent of the RPA should manage the pro ject (agreed its called the DTA)

Right or wrong the end result is much better isn't it? Would it have happened anyway we shall have to wait till the cabinet papers, I'd like to think it made a difference, wishfull possibly but at least people started to talk about it and look where we are now

dowlingm · 21-08-2006 5:43pm

It's important to be clear about what is public transport - for instance you can have public transport which is public owned, private owned or public owned but privately delivered (which I think LUAS could be described as, since RPA is a public body).

I don't recall P11 or even its members agitating for private owned public transport but definitely expressing frustration at CIE (public owned public delivered) and their unions in comparison to what Connex/SIPTU have delivered - that's not the same thing.

maladroit · 21-08-2006 10:16pm

Umm.

I'm a little concerned now that the splitting of the thread makes my original comment, which was very much in the context of a P11 reply to someone else's original post, into something that it's not.

It now looks as if I came here and started a thread of the above title with no previous context!

Apologies to anyone now upset by this, all I was tyring to express at the time was my feeling that a particular reply to a particular post could play into the hands of those who oppose all public transport projects.

That'll teach me to go posting on the web . . .

Maladroit.

popebenny16 · 21-08-2006 10:40pm

To clarify I have refreshed myself by reading every page of our website, there is no anti public transport element to P11. We get just as fustrated with connex (I'm refusing to call them by their nice re-branded identity) as we do with IE.

That'll teach me to go posting on the web . . .

Maladroit.

To be fair to you, you are not the one who decided to go stirring things.

DerekP11 · 22-08-2006 8:41pm

Hobart wrote:

I've split the thread out from the other thread. As long as there is no crap, such as above which was apologised for, the thread could actually be interesting.

I am speaking here in an official capacity and not a personal one. I see no other reason, other than mischief, for "splitting" the original thread. While I have absolutely no problem, with the original posters question (and it has been addressed very well by Platform 11 members), I fear that the moderator responsible, Hobart, has made a grave mistake in "singling out" this particular issue and "highlighting" it as a stand alone thread. One could be forgiven for thinking that the said moderator, wishes to promote a debate that cannot possibly lead anywhere and only attempt to portray Platform 11 in some kind of bad light.

I have witnessed many threads going off topic here, but action to remedy it has, traditionally been patient and fair. However, the somewhat "immediate" splitting of a thread that specifically referred to Platform 11 in a negative way, concerning the core nature of our function (public transport) is a poor reflection on the moderator responsible and is suggestive of an "agenda". Perhaps the said moderator would like to explain what is "interesting" about the question posed?

As an organisation, Platform 11, has evolved into a very transparent and accountable outfit. We continually strive to be accessible and responsible in our work. Our web site states our policy and our message board is representative of supporters/observers and members views. The current committee are contactable by email and identifiable by photos. My own number is available online as a point of contact to both the media and the public.

Derek Wheeler.
Communications & Media Officer.
Platform 11. The National Rail Users Organisation.

MG · 23-08-2006 8:06am

DerekP11 wrote:

I am speaking here in an official capacity and not a personal one. I see no other reason, other than mischief, for "splitting" the original thread. While I have absolutely no problem, with the original posters question (and it has been addressed very well by Platform 11 members), I fear that the moderator responsible, Hobart, has made a grave mistake in "singling out" this particular issue and "highlighting" it as a stand alone thread. One could be forgiven for thinking that the said moderator, wishes to promote a debate that cannot possibly lead anywhere and only attempt to portray Platform 11 in some kind of bad light.

I have witnessed many threads going off topic here, but action to remedy it has, traditionally been patient and fair. However, the somewhat "immediate" splitting of a thread that specifically referred to Platform 11 in a negative way, concerning the core nature of our function (public transport) is a poor reflection on the moderator responsible and is suggestive of an "agenda". Perhaps the said moderator would like to explain what is "interesting" about the question posed?

As an organisation, Platform 11, has evolved into a very transparent and accountable outfit. We continually strive to be accessible and responsible in our work. Our web site states our policy and our message board is representative of supporters/observers and members views. The current committee are contactable by email and identifiable by photos. My own number is available online as a point of contact to both the media and the public.

Derek Wheeler.
Communications & Media Officer.
Platform 11. The National Rail Users Organisation.

Recommended reading:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0091906814/202-1670974-4971828?v=glance&n=266239&s=gateway&v=glance

Slice · 23-08-2006 9:05am

DerekP11

I have witnessed many threads going off topic here, but action to remedy it has, traditionally been patient and fair. However, the somewhat "immediate" splitting of a thread that specifically referred to Platform 11 in a negative way, concerning the core nature of our function (public transport)

I wouldn't say that P11 is anti-public transport, and it does seem odd/suspect that a thread should be split in this way. However DerekP11, I don't think it's fair to say that P11's core function is public transport when the organisation is so obviously concerned exclusively with rail as a mode of transport. Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe the organisation as a lobby group for commuter rail users in the Dublin region given that the organisation is so pre-occupied with this area..?

popebenny16 · 23-08-2006 9:40am

Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe the organisation as a lobby group for commuter rail users in the Dublin region given that the organisation is so pre-occupied with this area..?

enterprise · 23-08-2006 12:16pm

Slice wrote:

I wouldn't say that P11 is anti-public transport, and it does seem odd/suspect that a thread should be split in this way. However DerekP11, I don't think it's fair to say that P11's core function is public transport when the organisation is so obviously concerned exclusively with rail as a mode of transport. Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe the organisation as a lobby group for commuter rail users in the Dublin region given that the organisation is so pre-occupied with this area..?

"Pale Rail Lobby Group" anybody?

popebenny16 · 23-08-2006 12:41pm

"Pale Rail Lobby Group" anybody?

Was wondering when your two cents was going to appear. Didn't you read my last post?

enterprise · 23-08-2006 12:55pm

popebenny16 wrote:

Was wondering when your two cents was going to appear. Didn't you read my last post?

Thanks!

As far as I’m concerned P11's core objective is a lobby group for the Greater Dublin Commuter area. A job, which has to be said, in all interests of fairness, is done very well.

I just don't think P11 has the core strengths to be an effective lobby group for the entire country. Most of its main committee members are based in Dublin for example.

That’s my two cents worth.

aliveandkicking · 23-08-2006 12:55pm

popebenny16 wrote:

Didn't you read my last post?

Why let the truth get in the way of prejudice :rolleyes:

aliveandkicking · 23-08-2006 1:02pm

enterprise wrote:

Most of its main committee members are based in Dublin for example.

That’s my two cents worth.

Considering 4 out of the 6 committee members dont live in Dublin, that statement is completely false.

SeanW · 23-08-2006 1:57pm

Well, from my experience there are two types of P11 haters.

1: The Western "we got nothing Dublin gets everything" types and would like to see it starved of investment of any kind.
2: Trainspotters who hang around on the IRN messageboard who want to the gov't to spend loads of money on various nutter projects so they can photograph old locos hauling freight to all kinds of places or want the cravens/121 locos/<insert clapped out rolling stock type here> to be kept in service in perpetuity or until they fall to bits on the tracks.

But the most scary type:
3: People who fit both the above categories.

Anything to declare, Maladroit? Enterprise? Hobart? Ham'n'egger?

BTW, most of Ireland's rail network radiates from Dublin and that's where the most people are, AND where the worst traffic etc issues are. So that's where most (but note all) of P11s work is.

enterprise · 23-08-2006 2:08pm

aliveandkicking wrote:

Considering 4 out of the 6 committee members dont live in Dublin, that statement is completely false.

Ok I take that back. However my view is that P11 core strength is in the Dublin Commuter market.

MarkoP11 · 23-08-2006 2:23pm

There is a point to note
26 out of the 38 million journeys pa are entirely within the Greater Dublin Region, the majority of intercity passengers either start or complete there journey in Dublin, the fact the PA doesn't work in Heuston, lack of signage, lack of seats, seat reservations, catering etc impacts far on more people in Cork, Kerry, Galway and so on than it does in Dublin. Thurles and Longford are now Dublin suburban stations at 86 and 76 miles respectively out, Thurles is closer to Cork than Dublin BTW

Doing some simple math somewhere in the region of 80 to 85% of all rail passengers per annum pass through the Greater Dublin Region, it also happens to be the only place in the country where people are crushed in 5 days a week on nearly all rush hour trains. The 26 million odd Greater Dublin Region passengers are primarily commuters who use the train every day have monthly or annual tickets and thus are far more likely to complain than someone who takes the train between Dublin and Cork once a year to see a relative, thats the reality, each man woman and child makes 10 rail journeys a year on average, commuters do that in 5 days, I might have eyes on the back of my head but I won't know if the air conditioning died on such and such a intercity train unless someone tells me and that means a passenger must make the effort to get in touch, classic Irish attitude is to moan but not to take any positive action.

I'm up to my neck in crap about the problems in Cork for the last 4 months, I was standing on the concourse as the whole thing went pear shaped. The new Dublin Cork train and the strike that followed was a non Dublin issue really since only the Kildare line in Dublin terms was shut, Platform 11 was the first and only group to get the story to the press in April a full month before it happened, IE denied it and kept awfully quiet when it was going on, great fun being in Radio Kerry, East Coast, Red Fm etc without Barry Kenny in sight ah the freedom. The (Cork) Examiner was the only paper to run the story all the Dublin papers accepted Barry Kenny's word that all was well, to this day only a handful of people outside IE know what happened in Cork that morning at 4:30am, I do but cant prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Incidentally the last 5 emails I got from passengers where from Cork, Tralee, Nenagh, Clonmel and Newbridge only one of which commutes into Dublin, why did they email Platform 11? since Irish Rail couldn't/wouldn't give them an answer, we could. Strangely I cant remember the last DART passenger to get in touch, funny that ?

And the number one issue is? Car parking followed quickly by fares and timetables and everyone want to know when the old trains are heading to the scrapheap we won't be mourning the loss of the moving scrapheap that is half the IE fleet

aliveandkicking · 23-08-2006 2:34pm

enterprise wrote:

Ok I take that back. However my view is that P11 core strength is in the Dublin Commuter market.

But Why? Anyone who takes even a casual view of their website and message boards would realise it is very much a national organisation rather than the Dublin Centric organisation you seem to think it is.

Slice · 23-08-2006 2:37pm

I think concentrating on rail is somewhat baffling and it's an ineffective way to lobby for the interests of public transport users in general. I also think at times it's counter-productive in that it draws attention away from other causes perhaps more worthy of media attention.

Arguments in favour of doing so aside; to be so focused on Greater Dublin also undermine issues outside the capital. For example even though P11 do not lobby for or against the WRC, it's tone towards that campaign is distinctively negative and at times reduces the argument down to barefaced economics that implicitly relegate the status of the rest of the country as being secondary to the interests of Dublin commuters. This has the effect of undermining other public transport causes that have nothing to do with either rail or Dublin, or both. Even though I have no personal interest in the WRC (as an example) and I happen to live in Dublin, such arguments don't sit comfortably with me.

I appreciate that there are plenty of discussions on the P11 site dealing with non-Dublin issues. However I wasn't so much referring to discussion within the group but more the public profile of the group - and a quick glance at their press releases clearly show a preoccupation with Dublin that dominates media/public debate.

I admit I am playing devil's advocate here because I generally agree with allot of what P11 have to say. However, I also happen to think that P11 campaigns don't need to cannibalise on any other causes to achieve its stated goals.

Ultimately transport use (public or private) is tied to planning and spatial strategy this seems to be where the disconnect lies for P11.

MarkoP11 · 23-08-2006 3:12pm

Commuter rail for Limerick is a local issue, problem is public meeting held only a handful showed up that said contacts with a number of people in the Limerick area are maintained and there has been in the last 3 or 4 months some good discussion with local politicians interested (or more correctly pissed off) in what Limerick should have got in Transport 21, I've got a 10 page document out with some interested parties but they don't seem very interested after I mentioned the need for a solid planning strategy i.e. ban on once off housing to make it work, we can get that in Dublin e.g. Adamstown, Hansfield but beyond no one cares apart from the crew in Cork who quietly without a fuss got on with it.

Regardless the case to make to work in Limerick is not yet there and it will only work if development is planned, like I said mention that and bang doors close and no one wants to know.

Half the passengers boarding in Ennis are en route to Dublin which goes back to the 80-85% GDR issue, we look forward to the 8 million or so passengers on Cork Suburban in 2016, that said in Dublin it will be closer to 150 million by then thats the way it is

The one thing we have been arguing for ages is that public transport and development are linked without one you can't get the other, Midleton is the classic case study, I've written the presentations on this http://www.platform11.org/news/news.php?year=2006&no=10.html or maybe the Irish Times piece about the population stats (http://www.platform11.org/about_us/press_articles/irish_times_1jun05.php)

However, it is clear that balanced regional development is needed as highlighted in the recent national spatial strategy.

Limerick city, with four radiating railway lines, has the potential to form an excellent integrated network promoting development. With the exception of the successful Limerick-Ennis service, the railway lines into Limerick lie idle to commuters. The rapidly-growing Raheen industrial estate already has a line but no service.

Equally Galway, with its station positioned in Eyre Square, offers a unique opportunity for commuter rail services from Oranmore with high-quality bus links to the Parkmore and Ballybrit industrial estates, and services possibly stretching farther to Athenry and later to Tuam and Ennis.

We must avoid the unsustainable car-dependent culture as Ireland grows. It is in our interests, with the total population expected to exceed five million by 2021, according to the CSO.

Thats it on record in the paper of record

Aidan1 · 23-08-2006 3:37pm

But its a Dublin paper!

Sorry, as a non member of P11 (or of any other organisation), theres one thing that needs to be pointed out ....

For example even though P11 do not lobby for or against the WRC, it's tone towards that campaign is distinctively negative and at times reduces the argument down to barefaced economics that implicitly relegate the status of the rest of the country as being secondary to the interests of Dublin commuters

I don't think thats either accurate or fair. The argument does come down to economics, just in a more complex way than some people think; maximising social benefit in return for public money spent is what this is all about. Have a look at the Faber Maunsell Rept on the Midleton line, its a partial CBA (and a good one) of the project. It works out a range of NPV/IRR scenarios for the line on the basis of the land use and population studies which underlie the CASP (and thus zoning and planning policy in the area affected).

No such exercise was carried out for the WRC, it appears because the result would have been overwhelmingly negative, in other words, that the social benefit would not have even come close to suggested the project as an appropriate use of public monies.

P11 have a history of supporting rail projects in areas other than Dublin, as Mark has shown, just that they have applied a rational criteria to the projects they've pushed. As a semi professional lobby group, they have to do this; otherwise they'd be a joke (stand up IRN, I mean you).

MG · 23-08-2006 3:56pm

Slice wrote:

I think concentrating on rail is somewhat baffling and it's an ineffective way to lobby for the interests of public transport users in general. I also think at times it's counter-productive in that it draws attention away from other causes perhaps more worthy of media attention.

Arguments in favour of doing so aside; to be so focused on Greater Dublin also undermine issues outside the capital. For example even though P11 do not lobby for or against the WRC, it's tone towards that campaign is distinctively negative and at times reduces the argument down to barefaced economics that implicitly relegate the status of the rest of the country as being secondary to the interests of Dublin commuters. This has the effect of undermining other public transport causes that have nothing to do with either rail or Dublin, or both. Even though I have no personal interest in the WRC (as an example) and I happen to live in Dublin, such arguments don't sit comfortably with me.

I appreciate that there are plenty of discussions on the P11 site dealing with non-Dublin issues. However I wasn't so much referring to discussion within the group but more the public profile of the group - and a quick glance at their press releases clearly show a preoccupation with Dublin that dominates media/public debate.

I admit I am playing devil's advocate here because I generally agree with allot of what P11 have to say. However, I also happen to think that P11 campaigns don't need to cannibalise on any other causes to achieve its stated goals.

Ultimately transport use (public or private) is tied to planning and spatial strategy this seems to be where the disconnect lies for P11.

A lot of valid points here. There are people here saying that they feel P11 does not represent them. They are saying that P11’s actions appear to be inordinately focused on the Greater Dublin Area and are not supportive enough the rest of the country. There is a disconnect between what we are seeing and the claim that P11 is a national lobby. I would suggest that P11 need to define their mission and align their actions and their PR to it. At the moment, the claim that they are a national organisation is undermined by their inaction, perceived or real, on a national level or their dismissal of non GDA issues.

Surely what P11 should be asking themselves is where their PR is going wrong that it is failing to convince. (I would be of the opinion that their PR is failing because it is not correct – P11 is mostly a Dublin Lobby). Unfortunately, their PR sounds like they are virtually saying “you just don’t get it do you, stoopid?”. This has been an unappealing trait of P11 for a while now. Their PR is abrasive, to say the least, and often aggressive, arrogant and paranoid. Strangely enough, a lot of people don’t like it. In the end, it’s P11 who suffer.

Possibly the greatest indictment of P11 I can offer is that I am happy to be a member of the most professional, effective rail lobby group in Ireland – the AA.

popebenny16 · 23-08-2006 4:19pm

Possibly the greatest indictment of P11 I can offer is that I am happy to be a member of the most professional, effective rail lobby group in Ireland – the AA.

Me too, it came with the finance on my car. Sadly we dont have their money or resources. I'd say that if we (the committee) did it full time and could afford to leave our jobs we'd get more done in a week than we can do in a year.

Well, look, lads, I really dont want to repeat my rudeness up above. If the posters here think they can improve P11, because the recent posts are putting themselves out as helpful and suggestive well, dont just post about it here, join us as full members and help us out.

Also:

What points are being made here? This thread was started by Hobart, for some reason which he alone seems to know about, as "Is P11 anti-public transport" I asked people to find one instance that shows we're not. No-one has.

So, that battle being lost, we get the pale rail one, started up, again for their own reasons, by another mod on this forum. Starting to see a trend here? That one is being lost so...

.... start up a third one, Why is P11 just about railways? Surely if we wanted something done for public transport we'd be about other things as well? We're about railways because we are rail users and we know about them. I use moterways and roads all the time, dont know anything about them, why should I be a member of any group that does?

Here's the forth one:

has been an unappealing trait of P11 for a while now. Their PR is abrasive, to say the least, and often aggressive, arrogant and paranoid. Strangely enough, a lot of people don’t like it. In the end, it’s P11 who suffer.

When you get threads like this one, can you blame the reaction? What arrogance and paranoia can you show to back up that statement?

I was looking with interest on the thread here about the total lack of interest in people doing something about the N81 Blessington road. People are great when they can sit on their backsides and carp on about things on the interweb, getting them out to do something is a different matter, isnt that right MG?

MarkoP11 · 23-08-2006 4:47pm

If you claim YOU are not represented did you bother to contact us formally by post/email/phone, I doubt you did. If you had a leaky pipe at home you call a plumber he doesn't appear otherwise thats how it works you need to contact us, you clearly know we exist so instead of promoting a negative attitude and wearing your keyboard out here why didn't you contact us directly. High level things like strikes and infrastructure are easy since they are fairly obvious things compared to the air con died on the 12:40 to Westport last Friday that requires feedback

If you have a problem you need to take the 5 minutes to contact us, email, phone post on the message board, all details on the website. We cannot go to war on a issue until we actually can prove it happened, that means we need to either witness it ourselves (not easy) or someone gets in touch with the following

I was on train x date y the following went wrong, I was told nothing/lied to etc......

I've dealt with many people looking for the simplest information possible since Irish Rail can't provide it, thats very worrying. I have the chance to go face to face with IE staff regularly enough and get straight answers. Much research is often required not to mention travel to the errant location to photograph etc, hell for a few weeks I had pencilled myself to visit to a certain European city, I was passing close by on business regardless in the search of proof to back up a story, eyes pealed there is a 8 digit sum of money involved.

Irish Rail have developed a significant media office to cover up there mess, there are no fewer than 5 people working in the press/media office (its grown a lot since P11 appeared.....), yes at least 5 for an outfit that writes maybe 2 letters a week to the papers and takes several weeks to reply to anything in writing. The 5 of them are sitting there quietly massaging the truth to deny issues, that there job to make the indefensible look good, they denied the problems in Cork and what happened we had a strike. You want to try doing a live radio piece against Barry Kenny its a no win situation unless you can produce undeniable facts, dates, places, the threat of names (data protection means we can't) but you get the picture

You might want to try it sometime since its painful and the press are sick and tired of people moaning about Irish Rail

Red Alert · 23-08-2006 6:21pm

We could start saving money by concentrating on services and sending the crap tincans back to whoever is making the latest batch.

Current irish rolling stock has a wide spread of ages, and this desperation drive to make everything brand new is a waste of time. Carriages should have been replaced like for like, or refurbished where possible. 121/071/201's all have many years of a natural lifespan left - CIE need to get real.

shamwari · 23-08-2006 7:36pm

Aidan1 wrote:

But its a Dublin paper!

otherwise they'd be a joke (stand up IRN, I mean you).

Irrespective of whether you love or hate P11, this country has a legitimate need for properly run and focused national transport lobby group, and not just rail. Having said that, can P11 claim to have matched IRN's success where I believe the lobbied and successfully achieved the adding of a new services to the Nenagh - Limerick line, with the promise that more will be added when more stock becomes available. This is not a smart poke at P11 or anyone else. I'm simply asking how can a bunch of supposed train spotters achieve something that no one else has managed to thus far?

MarkoP11 · 23-08-2006 7:55pm

The Nenagh Rail partnership got a train retimed by a few minutes, it later transpired that the train had to be retimed due to Dublin Cork changes it was hyped as a improvement but they failed to achieve the goal of making it possible to get into and out of Limerick to suit working hours. It was classic Irish Rail smokescreen they got something which later upon examination was nothing, they know that someone emailed in to agree with my assessment

If you actually work for IE it is of course easier to get what you want personally

Sunday services for Kildare line are go from December or so we have been told, long been a bone of contention only commuter line in the country with no Sunday service (Cobh and Ennis do) IE had agreed a December Sunday service last year for Christmas but pulled it without reason

There is an agreed published list of future service frequencies on all routes, extra services where quoted for Nenagh many years ago, they don't have any trains to run it currently, no point asking until sufficent trains actually become available which is looking ever distant

DerekP11 · 23-08-2006 9:50pm

I note with, regret, that yet another moderator of this forum, Enterprise, has decided to contribute to this almost "schizophrenic" thread. It is indeed unfortunate, that some moderators have seen fit to try and "provoke" a debate that attempts to undermine the integrity of a voluntary organisation. One would fully expect and accept that from ordinary board members and as P11 is in the public domain, we take it on the chin, as we are well able to dish it out. But the one key issue on this thread is the behaviour of two particular moderators.

The motive behind splitting a thread and creating this one, has already been questioned by some people (including the OP) that have no connection whatsoever with P11. It is a very poor reflection on the forum and anyone with even an ounce of sense could see that Hobart and Enterprise as moderators and MG as a forum member (who seems to thrive on the moderator endorsed direction) are the only contributors that appear to have any "real issue" with P11. Is there a connection, I wonder?

As for MG and the recommended reading material remark...its rather pathetic and far beneath me, so I won't comment on it any further.

MG's comments on P11 PR are purely opinionated nonsense and non-substanciated.

P11 will continue to grow, expand and ultimately, make a very realistic contribution to the development of rail based public transport in this country. In the years ahead, Government documents will note our contribution and books will reference us in areas of rail transport. Its already started;

Quote from "Gridlock" by James Wickham.

"Above all they provide constructive and well-informed criticism of Irish Rail's curious combination of engineering competence and organisational sloth"

P11 is a mere three and a half years in existance. Our UK equivalent has 30 years on us. P11 will be around long after many members of this board are pushing up daisies. None of the misguided and inflammatory remarks by certain contributors to this thread will change that. I suggest you deal with it and move on.

Thank you for the publicity. Its much appreciated.

popebenny16 · 23-08-2006 9:57pm

Shamwari:

I live and work in North Tipperary. Any thanks that are due should go to the Chambers of Commerce of Roscrea and Nenagh and also to North Tipperary Country Council. There are no improvements in the Nenagh service. There is one tweak to the timetable which as Mark says IE made a big show of without telling local people that they had no choice but to do it so that the train could connect with the train in Ballybrophy.

We dont do anything, of course. So that success stories section of our website is full of fiction, dont yew know.

By the way, I'm also a member of IRN.

Hobart · 23-08-2006 10:12pm

DerekP11 wrote:

I note with, regret, that yet another moderator of this forum, Enterprise, has decided to contribute to this almost "schizophrenic" thread. It is indeed unfortunate, that some moderators have seen fit to try and "provoke" a debate that attempts to undermine the integrity of a voluntary organisation. ...

Folks, I created this thread. I also posted "on thread" that I would like the debate to remain civil. Comments like that above (provoked or not) are not welcome. Everybody has the use of the report post button. Everybody has the use of the feedback board and everybody has the functionality of PM's.

Can I address this to ALL posters who have and who will post on this thread. The subject matter is clearly emotive and is being dealt with by members of P11 and members of different "organisations". Do not post anything as fact, unless it is a fact and can be backed up with some sort of documentary proof, be that a link or a scan.

This is actually a good discussion, and has not, as was earlier believed, descended into a P11 bashing excercise. Please let it continue as such.

Hobart.

DerekP11 · 23-08-2006 11:18pm

Hobart wrote:

Folks, I created this thread. I also posted "on thread" that I would like the debate to remain civil. Comments like that above (provoked or not) are not welcome.

Can you please explain to me why my comments, which you singled out, are not welcome?

The thread can easily be described as "schizophrenic" as its contents have strayed, in various unrelated directions to what the thread is meant to be about. (even the original topic and motives behind it are questionable.) Furthermore, my point about certain moderators on this forum is very much valid and I offer their contribution to this thread as evidence.

If my comments,(which have been unoffensive to anyone) are perceived in this way, then I would suggest that you are further attempting to provoke and at the same time prevent any defense of the P11 name. This is not fair and accountable moderation.

Hobart · 24-08-2006 12:14am

DerekP11 wrote:

Can you please explain to me why my comments, which you singled out, are not welcome?

The thread can easily be described as "schizophrenic" as its contents have strayed, in various unrelated directions to what the thread is meant to be about. (even the original topic and motives behind it are questionable.) Furthermore, my point about certain moderators on this forum is very much valid and I offer their contribution to this thread as evidence.

If my comments,(which have been unoffensive to anyone) are perceived in this way, then I would suggest that you are further attempting to provoke and at the same time prevent any defense of the P11 name. This is not fair and accountable moderation.

No problem at all.

I quoted a "specific" part of your post which attacked another user. This is not what the thread is for. The thread is specifically for the discussion which is outlined in the thread topic.

You used this thread, to attack a poster. A poster who happens to be a moderator. I have no issue with scolding Enterprise or Victor if what they say I deem to be off-topic. If I deem what they say to be offensive or if one of them attacks the poster not the post.

The latter is what you are guilty of. Hence my reminding you of the various mechanisms available to you if you have an issue with a mod or any other user.

Enterprise's comments, while you felt that they were unwelcome and were subsequently inaccurate, have been withdrawn "on thread". I simply do not understand why you felt the need to further inflame the situation by going on the "attack" against another user. A user who happens to be a moderator.

You then seem to take a swipe at me, for some unknown reason, when all I am trying to do is to allow this and other conversations to flow freely without the type of sh1t that you and I are talking now.

There are a number of avenues open to you, if my answer does not meet your requirements. These are as follows:

1) Pm another moderator of this forum and complain.
2) Pm the admins of the site and state your grieviences
3) Start a thread on feedback
4) Start a thread on the helpdesk
5) Just don't post on this thread anymore.

What I would ask you not to do is to drag this conversation anymore off-topic than it already is (and no, I'm not blaming you for "dragging" this off-topic). If my explanation/answer does not satisfy you, please feel free to PM me and I will try to clarify "my reasons".

weehamster · 24-08-2006 1:43am

I'm sorry but I've been reading this thread, and I’m still wondering, what is this thread about. What is the topic? This is what I see the possibilities are on what this thread could be about.

If the topic is what the title states, "Is P11 anti public transport", then this is one of the most pointless topics I have ever seen on this Commuting/Transport section.

How can a group who goal is to basically bring our poor standard of rail (which last time I check is public transport) to the same as the average standard which currently and has been enjoyed by our fellow original 15 members of the European Union for many years, be deemed anti public transport?

I’m sorry, but the only reason for someone to start this topic is either

a) They don’t know anything about P11, in which case they either
(i) Didn’t know where to find info on them or
(ii) That they knew where to find info and they didn’t bother to look it up

b) They do know who P11 and is that case this topic serves no other
purpose other than to blacken their name.

Now if the above is incorrect and this is not the topic then please close this thread and start again with the correct title which correctly describes what the topic is about.

weehamster · 24-08-2006 1:47am

And by the way, while I’m here, I would like to remind you all (as some appear to have forgotten the whole point of all this) that we do have a poor standard of rail system in this country. Don’t believe me, then just simply head to France, Holland Belgium, Denmark, Germany etc... and travel around by train, see how they run their systems, then come back here and compare.

And if you feel annoyed about the differences and that our Government is not making a serious and urgent attempt to correct this , then why don’t a few of you get together and form a group . You could then try to lobby the Government into transforming our system to the same standard as the rest of the 15 EU countries.

And you could start with our states limited budget for rail development and how you would prioritise the allocation of this limited budget with projects which are urgently need going first and non-urgent projects last.

Hobart · 24-08-2006 7:04am

weehamster wrote:

I'm sorry but I've been reading this thread, and I’m still wondering, what is this thread about. What is the topic? This is what I see the possibilities are on what this thread could be about......

You seem to believe that the thread is in someway meant to discuss wether P11 is anti public transport. I think you are confusing public transport, with transport available to the public. The emphasis, as I understand it in the thread title should be on the public bit. As in publically owned. Not publically available. That's my understanding of it.
Also I can edit the title, if that's what is required. There is no real need to start another thread.

If somebody wishes to suggest a more suitable title for the thread, please feel free to PM me. All the usual "toungue in cheek" titles willl, of course, be ignored.

MG · 24-08-2006 7:25am

popebenny16 wrote:

Well, look, lads, I really dont want to repeat my rudeness up above. If the posters here think they can improve P11, because the recent posts are putting themselves out as helpful and suggestive well, dont just post about it here, join us as full members and help us out.

You are quite right, I am trying to be constructive but look at it from my point of view. Do you really think I should spend a tenner to join P11? If my views are attacked here, would I be listened to if I joined?
“MG's comments on P11 PR are purely opinionated nonsense and non-substanciated (sic).”
Forgive me if I keep my cash.

popebenny16 wrote:

Also:

What points are being made here? This thread was started by Hobart, for some reason which he alone seems to know about, as "Is P11 anti-public transport" I asked people to find one instance that shows we're not. No-one has.

So, that battle being lost, we get the pale rail one, started up, again for their own reasons, by another mod on this forum. Starting to see a trend here? That one is being lost so....

I would have thought it was a natural follow on. If there is confusion and doubt about whether P11 is for public or private transport, just as there is doubt in whether it truly cares about non-GDA rail, then I see that as a communication issue. The message in my post is that P11s PR is not up to standard.

popebenny16 wrote:

When you get threads like this one, can you blame the reaction? What arrogance and paranoia can you show to back up that statement?

I fully stand over my comments that P11s PR is “abrasive, to say the least, and often aggressive, arrogant and paranoid”. Although it clearly does not apply to all posters, there is ample evidence in this thread to vindicate this statement.

popebenny16 wrote:

I was looking with interest on the thread here about the total lack of interest in people doing something about the N81 Blessington road. People are great when they can sit on their backsides and carp on about things on the interweb, getting them out to do something is a different matter, isnt that right MG?

I don’t buy this argument. Is my opinion not worthy of the attention of the National Rail Lobby?

Slice · 24-08-2006 9:12am

Popebenny16

What arrogance and paranoia can you show to back up that statement?

I think the arrogance perceived or otherwise comes from the fact that P11 claim to be representing the interest of all rail users and yet they are so hostile towards WOT which undermines this claim and damages the organisation's credibility.

P11 seem to be most effective when they are behind a strong case such as the interconnector or Dublin Airport rail link. Their arguments are rationale and coherent which stands out from other voices in the debate that are against improved rail services of which there are many (I'm especially thinking SIMI or Dublin Chamber of Commerce in the run-up to the completion of Luas). The problem is that they also use these same arguments against the WRC, say what you will about those arguments but the subtext is this; "Our issues, as a rail user lobby group should be heard because we're right, other rail user lobby groups are wrong if not consistent with us".

With the exception of alienating people who perhaps might support both the WRC and P11 what does such a stance achieve? Could this preception in some way have something to do with low turn-out at public meetings beyond the Pale?

It's based on the false assumption that whatever money spent on the public transport projects P11 don't endorse will be spent on projects P11 do endorse when in fact this isn't the case. Who can assume that Government would re-allocate money they may be thinking of spending on the WRC on the interconnector? It is very plausible that the money in question would go to some other cause around the western sea-board such as a rail connection to Shannon Airport or improving public transport in Cork or Limerick. There is also the contradiction being that P11 don't campaign against say funds wasted on the M3 as an example, which in all likelihood is taking away from money that would otherwise be spent on a Navan rail connection. To give another more extreme example would be the money spent on electonic voting; where is P11's voice there?

The most prudent thing P11 could do when it comes to the interests of other rail users or public transport users in general is to stay quiet if its members don't agree on those campaigns they are fighting for, otherwise to claim P11 is a national rail user lobby group is off the mark. There are plenty of other voices against the WRC so it's not as those opposition to that issue could not be expressed through other organisations...? I'm sure the PDs for example would be against it also

markpb · 24-08-2006 9:38am

Disclaimer: I'm not a committee member of P11 so I speak for myself.

Slice wrote:

It's based on the false assumption that whatever money spent on the public transport projects P11 don't endorse will be spent on projects P11 do endorse when in fact this isn't the case. Who can assume that Government would re-allocate money they may be thinking of spending on the WRC on the interconnector? It is very plausible that the money in question would go to some other cause around the western sea-board such as a rail connection to Shannon Airport or improving public transport in Cork or Limerick.

The real fear surrounding WOT is not that it will cost a fortune that could be better spent on other rail projects. Rather, it is that it will be built and no-one will use it. Much political hand-wringing and blame-appropriation will happen and future govenments will be less willing to fund any more public transport projects while WOT is sucking subsidies out of the pot.

It's not that P11 are anti-public transport, it's just that they want the right infrastructure built for the right reasons. Bad, politically-driven projects costs all pt users in the long run.

Slice wrote:

I think the arrogance perceived or otherwise comes from the fact that P11 claim to be representing the interest of all rail users and yet they are so hostile towards WOT which undermines this claim and damages the organisation's credibility.

<tongue in cheek>WOT doesn't exist so there are no rail users to represent.</tongue in cheek>

There is also the contradiction being that P11 don't campaign against say funds wasted on the M3 as an example, which in all likelihood is taking away from money that would otherwise be spent on a Navan rail connection. To give another more extreme example would be the money spent on electonic voting; where is P11's voice there?

If P11 took a shotgun approach to lobbying, they'd get precisely nowhere. They would take on everyone, become everyone's enemy and achieve nothing.

SeanW · 24-08-2006 9:44am

Hobart, I must confess I have a very hard time taking any of this seriously.

You seem to believe that the thread is in someway meant to discuss wether P11 is anti public transport.

Not an unreasonable assumption given that you titled the thread "Is P11 anti public transport." and put maladroits name to it.

I think you are confusing public transport, with transport available to the public. The emphasis, as I understand it in the thread title should be on the public bit. As in publically owned. Not publically available. That's my understanding of it.

Just about everyone, everywhere, considers "public transport" to refer to mass transport available to the public. like buses, trains etc without particular regard to who's running it.

I really fail to understand, Hobart, what on Earth did you expect to accomplish by starting this thread (under another posters name, no less) with such a loaded title?