Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann to reduce services & cut jobs.

Danuogma

Many people who drive to work will be charged 200 quid, one of the reasons we were given for this levy (stealth tax) is that it would incentivise people to use public transport.

10% of Dublin Buses fleet is going to be cut... LOL, you couldn't make it up.
I wonder if Gormley will do something about this insanity, or will he just keep his gob shut as usual?.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0113/breaking69.htm

murfie

Are we even surprised by this anymore. sooner the greens wake up and realise they will be brunt of the voters furry next time around the better. I say they get out while they can.
Dunno should we laugh or cry at this and other things that seem to come out day after day!

pawrick

this will be the first of many cuts - it is what most of the posters in some of the other threads were calling for - 10% cuts here and there with no thought of what makes most sense - so you get what you shout loudest for! that's the way politics works in Ireland.

NewDubliner

Danuogma wrote: »

Many people who drive to work will be charged 200 quid, one of the reasons we were given for this levy (stealth tax) is that it would incentivise people to use public transport.

Maybe wait and see what routes/schedules are cut back?

Húrin

Why would you expect the Greens take the brunt of voter fury? Most of the problems are more Fianna Fail's fault than theirs.

nesf

Húrin wrote: »

Why would you expect the Greens take the brunt of voter fury? Most of the problems are more Fianna Fail's fault than theirs.

*cough*

PDs

*cough*

Caoimhe89

10% cutback on the fleet just weeks after Dublin Bus upping their prices? So not only are we to pay for using cars, but we're also to pay more for less buses and services?

This is just outrageous. Now there is no possible justification for the fare increases on buses. Surely, with oil prices falling and with less buses AND employees, Dublin Bus could afford to drop prices? No? It just defies all logic.

Time Magazine

Caoimhe89 wrote: »

This is just outrageous. Now there is no possible justification for the fare increases on buses. Surely, with oil prices falling and with less buses AND employees, Dublin Bus could afford to drop prices? No? It just defies all logic.

Their subsidy doesn't go to good use.

mikemac

Caoimhe89 wrote: »

Surely, with oil prices falling.....

Like many large organizations Dublin Bus hedge their fuel costs. It's not unusual and sound business practice.
They'd bought future contracts for $100 per barrell of oil when the price was $150 plus.
They thought they got a cracking deal and Minister Dempsey praised them on the radio. Last Word on Today Fm to be specific.

Price of oil collapsed soon afterwards. Realy it doesn't matter if it goes any lower as the contract price is set.

fly_agaric

The Economist wrote: »

Their subsidy doesn't go to good use.

And your single graph proves that point how exactly?

Time Magazine

fly_agaric wrote: »

And your single graph proves that point how exactly?

My single graph shows that Dublin Bus is a monopolistic monster. It's a black hole. Defying all logic, the government continued to increase their subsidy to above five times the 1998 value from 3.5x, even though it was not tempting more people onto buses.

The post I quoted stated "Dublin Bus could afford to drop prices? No? It just defies all logic."

Dublin Bus, government transport subsidies and logic don't bed well.

Caoimhe89

mikemac wrote: »

Like many large organizations Dublin Bus hedge their fuel costs. It's not unusual and sound business practice.
They'd bought future contracts for $100 per barrell of oil when the price was $150 plus.
They thought they got a cracking deal and Minister Dempsey praised them on the radio. Last Word on Today Fm to be specific.

Price of oil collapsed soon afterwards. Realy it doesn't matter if it goes any lower as the contract price is set.

And for how long is this contract going to continue? And if they are staying at $100 per barrell, surely there is no need for prices to increase?

Húrin

nesf wrote: »

*cough*

PDs

*cough*

Good point. However, the PDs actually did manage to get their programme adopted (an unpopular programme, apparently), but the Greens did not. So it is surely clear that Fianna Fail are to blame? Or do you think there is a "FF can do no wrong" factor at play with some voters?

bmaxi

pawrick wrote: »

this will be the first of many cuts - it is what most of the posters in some of the other threads were calling for - 10% cuts here and there with no thought of what makes most sense - so you get what you shout loudest for! that's the way politics works in Ireland.

In that case, why are Cowen, Lenihan and Coughlan still in office?
Dermot Ahern said today he couldn't see the point in cutting out a few Junior Ministers. Is it a case of "cuts all round except for us". Shades of Marie Antoinette here and we all know what happened to her.

murfie

Húrin wrote: »

Or do you think there is a "FF can do no wrong" factor at play with some voters?

Thats exactly the view of many on this very site, they will say "sure look at the alternative, they are the same" and will continue to for FF. Give them a chance i say.

The greens were not voted for by FF supporters, in fact they were elected by voters who would have wanted an alternative to FF. So yes in the next election they will be destroyed, hope that election is sooner later than later! cmon independents and backbenchers!!

youcrazyjesus!

The Economist wrote: »

My single graph shows that Dublin Bus is a monopolistic monster. It's a black hole. Defying all logic, the government continued to increase their subsidy to above five times the 1998 value from 3.5x, even though it was not tempting more people onto buses.

The post I quoted stated "Dublin Bus could afford to drop prices? No? It just defies all logic."

Dublin Bus, government transport subsidies and logic don't bed well.

What's the solution? Allow private operators cream what profits there are on popular routes and Dublin Bus and the taxpayer can pick up the tab for the unprofitable routes? Of which there are many. It makes me really annoyed that so called economists cannot grasp a very basic point about Dublin Bus, I would have thought it would something you'd study in your first semester in college. Dublin Bus provides a social and economic service to the city as a whole, it's value to the city cannot be calculated.

If we introduce private operators, how can they run on unprofitable routes? Answer: they won't. Therefore we'll STILL be subsidising Dublin Bus, private concerns will be creaming profits and there'll be NO chance for Dublin Bus to ever become self-sufficient.

Can there be cost-savings implemented? Absolutely, but driving a bus in this city is an extremely difficult job and I think the drivers shouldn't be made take the pain. I say this is as somebody who has no association with Dublin Bus and I have no relatives or friends employed by them. I think it's just common sense. Slashing services, service hours and the fleet is a short-sighted act. There's even less reason to use public transport now.

IRLConor

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

What's the solution?

Figure out why they're doing the same job for more money. Fix that.

It's obviously a non-trivial task to fix them, but I don't think cutting numbers blindly or mass privatisation will help. Continuing to send good money after bad in a recession isn't an option either, we simply can't afford it.

It may even be an intractable problem. The inefficiency may turn out to be a deep organisational problem and I don't fancy anyone's chances at fixing deep organisational issues in any large organisation, particularly one with a heavily unionised workforce.

wolfpawnat

They need to warn us more about cancelling services.

Last Monday I was on a bus from Busaras to Limerick, then change in Limerick for Ennis, got to Ennis and waited for the Kilkee bus, only to be told that as of that day it no longer ran at that time. cost me €72 to get a taxi to Kilrush. :mad: 2 weeks living expenses.no warning

Het-Field

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

What's the solution? Allow private operators cream what profits there are on popular routes and Dublin Bus and the taxpayer can pick up the tab for the unprofitable routes? Of which there are many. It makes me really annoyed that so called economists cannot grasp a very basic point about Dublin Bus, I would have thought it would something you'd study in your first semester in college. Dublin Bus provides a social and economic service to the city as a whole, it's value to the city cannot be calculated.

If we introduce private operators, how can they run on unprofitable routes? Answer: they won't. Therefore we'll STILL be subsidising Dublin Bus, private concerns will be creaming profits and there'll be NO chance for Dublin Bus to ever become self-sufficient.

Can there be cost-savings implemented? Absolutely, but driving a bus in this city is an extremely difficult job and I think the drivers shouldn't be made take the pain. I say this is as somebody who has no association with Dublin Bus and I have no relatives or friends employed by them. I think it's just common sense. Slashing services, service hours and the fleet is a short-sighted act. There's even less reason to use public transport now.

It is no excuse not to allow for Private enterpire to enter the transport market. The non profitable routes should be downsized. They should be run tantamount, or as part of a more profitable route, or at very lest limit the amout of codicil style buses which run far too often. There is no need to run extra buses for the tens of people who wish to avail of a fast bus house.

If the Governement wish to provide their own service, then so be it. However, the monopoly is completely uancceptable. It has what has led us to a poor and inefficient service, where buses will come late, or not at all. We also have to deal with disgusting buses covered in spilled alcohol, sopft drinks, remenaints of bagels, sandwiches and rolls, and newspapers. Many drivers are rude and unhelpful. This is not a service to be proud of, yet it is a service that Fianna Fail have been proven to maintain, and buttress when any competition has come against it.

If the Government is really averse to competition, all they need to do is split CIE into two competing companies. No copnsumer driven economy should be willing to buttress an inefficient service to maintain a few unprofitable routes

youcrazyjesus!

IRLConor wrote: »

Figure out why they're doing the same job for more money. Fix that.

It's obviously a non-trivial task to fix them, but I don't think cutting numbers blindly or mass privatisation will help. Continuing to send good money after bad in a recession isn't an option either, we simply can't afford it.

It may even be an intractable problem. The inefficiency may turn out to be a deep organisational problem and I don't fancy anyone's chances at fixing deep organisational issues in any large organisation, particularly one with a heavily unionised workforce.

Yes they should look for efficiencies, they should be smart about this, be smart about routes and timetables, and yes big help is needed from the unions WITHOUT having their hand out for extra dough, but slashing services blindly isn't the way to go and looking at the bigger picture, their subsidy by international standards is very low. It amounts to €86 million per year. They also pay VAT on it.

And is the service provided by Dublin Bus not worth hundreds of millions to the city?

It seems like a lot of money but then again most routes are unprofitable, whether the bus equivalent of Michael O'Leary gets involved or not.

I'd also ask a number of questions before blaming.

Has the number of routes increased? Has the fleet size increased? Did drivers have their pay increased? How many new drivers? Pension contributions gone up? Is Dublin Bus paying more tax? Has oil gone up? Have new garages opened? Any one off costs? Have Dublin Bus invested in new technology? How much has inflation impacted on the figure? What costs are Dublin Bus paying to 3rd parties that have gone up? How much do Dublin Bus employees pay in income tax and how much has it gone up in recent years? How many people earn a living from Dublin Bus?

Before crying out "tear it down" maybe some of these questions could be considered before labelling Dublin Bus a black hole or just moaning about the increased subsidy without appearing to know or even care where the extra money is going.

Dublin Bus really grind my gears sometimes, last buses going off early and first buses no appearing at all share number 1 on my list, but I'm happy there's a comprehensive service in place which keeps the whole city functioning. It could be MUCH better and a lot of people are very reluctant to use it, justifiably in most cases but with the Metro next year we'll need Dublin Bus more than ever and now we're cutting back services? Even less people will use it. Sounds like a great plan.

I think the management should be looked at, from the board of directors down, who are all political appointees are they not? I'm not saying they're not doing a good job or unqualified but maybe something fresh is needed at the top.

Darragh29

Goes to show what brand of thick c*nts are running these operations when they have a virtual monopoly with their markets and still lose tens of millions of Euro.

youcrazyjesus!

Het-Field wrote: »

It is no excuse not to allow for Private enterpire to enter the transport market. The non profitable routes should be downsized. They should be run tantamount, or as part of a more profitable route, or at very lest limit the amout of codicil style buses which run far too often. There is no need to run extra buses for the tens of people who wish to avail of a fast bus house.

So if you don't live on a profitable route it's just tough luck, no bus for you!

If the Governement wish to provide their own service, then so be it. However, the monopoly is completely uancceptable. It has what has led us to a poor and inefficient service, where buses will come late, or not at all. We also have to deal with disgusting buses covered in spilled alcohol, sopft drinks, remenaints of bagels, sandwiches and rolls, and newspapers. Many drivers are rude and unhelpful. This is not a service to be proud of, yet it is a service that Fianna Fail have been proven to maintain, and buttress when any competition has come against it.

Then maybe we'll get even less value out of Dublin Bus and pay them even more money for less passengers.

Do you use the service?

I get the bus all the time, I'm lucky to live somewhere that's serviced by plenty of buses, generally I'm very happy with the service, the bus itself is clean most of the time and the drivers are usually fine. YMMV. The timetable is a joke, it's fiction and some buses don't turn up, on routes with less frequency I can see how this would drive you insane.

If the Government is really averse to competition, all they need to do is split CIE into two competing companies. No copnsumer driven economy should be willing to buttress an inefficient service to maintain a few unprofitable routes

But if you look at the economic benefit it provides to the city and answer some of the questions from my other post it might actually provide damn good value for the taxpayer.

Time Magazine

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

What's the solution? Allow private operators cream what profits there are on popular routes and Dublin Bus and the taxpayer can pick up the tab for the unprofitable routes? Of which there are many. It makes me really annoyed that so called economists cannot grasp a very basic point about Dublin Bus, I would have thought it would something you'd study in your first semester in college.

Lol, you're being very presumptuous about me.

There's a very simple solution that works extremely well in other countries. At the moment, if you want to run a bus service in Dublin (basically) you are just not allowed to do it. You will not be given a licence.

A much better system would be to split the city into several zones, say "North East" (covering Swords/Malahide/Portmarnock/etc), "North Central" (covering Glasnevin/Drumcondra/etc) and so on. These bundles will include a few profitable routes and also unprofitable ones. Then "auction" these bundles off. Dublin Bus are more than welcome to put their bid in. The bus service in Dublin provides an extremely important social and economic function and cannot be provided by the market. It requires a subsidy. These "bids" will thus be of negative values, "We'll do North East for €2m this year" and the contract will last ~5 years. The timetable will be part the bid and obviously quality/safety standards will have to be pre-conditions to being eligible for the contract.

This forces Dublin Bus to offer a service at levels of efficiency familiar to those who have worked in the private sector. Under the current system, we are being raped. Really, really, look at that graph. Dublin Bus's subsidy increased fivefold over the ten year period and although I'm the first to accept there have been improvements, it's certainly not five times as good as it was. The tax payer is being raped. Under the system I just proposed, Dublin Bus would lose their contracts to private operators. Even if no private companies won any contracts ever, Dublin Bus could still not let its quality slide too much because there is at least the ability for the State to switch provider. This is essentially the situation that operates in Edinburgh, for example, where Midlothian are the Dublin Bus equivalent but they're afraid of losing their contracts so they do a bang-up job. In Birmingham, a city not all that much bigger than Dublin, there are several bus companies competing -- and yet they still manage an integrated ticketing system them that works with private trains, too.

The current system is completely unacceptable and there are more options available than simply dropping unprofitable routes. Don't listen to Het-field: he's a PD, not an economist

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

their subsidy by international standards is very low. It amounts to €86 million per year. They also pay VAT on it.

That subsidy is mis-leading. They also get free buses. Really, we could do much better.

Has the number of routes increased? Has the fleet size increased? Did drivers have their pay increased? How many new drivers? Pension contributions gone up? Is Dublin Bus paying more tax? Has oil gone up? Have new garages opened? Any one off costs? Have Dublin Bus invested in new technology? How much has inflation impacted on the figure? What costs are Dublin Bus paying to 3rd parties that have gone up? How much do Dublin Bus employees pay in income tax and how much has it gone up in recent years? How many people earn a living from Dublin Bus?

The main cost increase, it seems, is workers' wages. If you take the number of employees in Dublin Bus and look at their total wage bill, it comes to €900 per week. Dublin Bus drivers gets paid 20% more than the industrial wage. Go to college for four years and earn less than a bus driver. Looking at how much they pay in income tax makes no sense if it's coming from the government in the first place. They'd be paying income tax if they worked for the Aircoach.

Of course we don't know exactly where the money goes because Dublin Bus refuse to tell us. Despite our taxes funding them, they refuse to make it public information how their money is distributed along the routes. And yes, I've asked. I was also told by a transport economist in TCD that they repeatedly refuse to give this information to the European Commission, too.

You might get some bus driver coming on here saying "Ah we're not that bad!" That's fine, if that's true then under my system they'll still win all the contracts. We're giving them hundreds of million of euro, the onus is on them to prove they're good at spending it.

IRLConor

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

their subsidy by international standards is very low. It amounts to €86 million per year.

But the fares are quite high. In real terms, how much money does the company take in per passenger-mile versus other comparable city bus operators?

City|Single Fare for Cash
Stockholm|€2.74-€5.48 (30-60SEK at today's rate)
Amsterdam|€1.60-€6.40
Berlin|€2.10-€2.80
Dublin|€1.15-€4.50
London|€2.20 (£2 at today's rate)
Helsinki|€2
Vienna|€1.70
Brussels|€1.60
Paris|€1.60
Lisbon|€1.40
Madrid|€1
Rome|€1


Why are we at the top end of that scale? It's not like we have the quality of public transport to demand that sort of premium.

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

They also pay VAT on it.

They pay VAT on the subsidy? Are you sure? You pay VAT on goods and services, not cash handed to you.

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

And is the service provided by Dublin Bus not worth hundreds of millions to the city?

I don't know how you could put a figure on the value to the city. To make a fair calculation you'd also have to calculate the "floor" value, i.e. the value of the bus network which would exist if buses weren't a regulated industry and I don't think anyone can figure that out.

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

It seems like a lot of money but then again most routes are unprofitable, whether the bus equivalent of Michael O'Leary gets involved or not.

Then re-organise the routes to minimise the losses. I'm willing to subsidise transport for those who cannot afford it otherwise, but if there aren't enough people to properly sustain a route then it should be cut.

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

I'd also ask a number of questions before blaming.

Has the number of routes increased? Has the fleet size increased? Did drivers have their pay increased? How many new drivers? Pension contributions gone up? Is Dublin Bus paying more tax? Has oil gone up? Have new garages opened? Any one off costs? Have Dublin Bus invested in new technology? How much has inflation impacted on the figure? What costs are Dublin Bus paying to 3rd parties that have gone up? How much do Dublin Bus employees pay in income tax and how much has it gone up in recent years? How many people earn a living from Dublin Bus?

The graph shown earlier (which I have no cause to doubt since it tallies with the figures I've seen over the years) shows that there has been a massive increase in the normalised cost per passenger. If the service levels had gone up accordingly then I'd be OK with it, but I don't think there's anyone in the country deluded enough to think that Dublin Bus services have improved 400% over the last 10 years.

Some of the factors above could be responsible for the increase in the subsidy needed but only if they were handled incredibly badly by the company.

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Before crying out "tear it down" maybe some of these questions could be considered before labelling Dublin Bus a black hole or just moaning about the increased subsidy without appearing to know or even care where the extra money is going.

To be honest, I don't care who runs the buses or how they're paid for and organised. If Dublin Bus fixes itself and starts providing the services it should, then I don't give a toss that it's a state monopoly. I just want value for my tax money and currently I don't get it.

thebman

Was in Edinburgh last year. Great bus service.

I agree that the zone system is the way to go. Dublin Bus does not offer value for money and even where private operators are operating (the Lucan area), Dublin Bus flooded the route to try to kill them off (probably other factors too). I used to get the 66 from Liffey to Maynooth and I used to watch usually 3 25A's go by before another bus would turn up and this was the route they flooded to try to kill the private operator.

No doubt in my mind what they were up to. Dublin Bus is filthy, uncomfortable and has druggies using it and alcoholics drinking on it and its too expensive considering the above so something has to change.

Almost all routes go from CC out with no routes anywhere else. If you live in Maynooth, you have to travel to the CC in some cases to go back out to get to where your going. Seems a bid ridiculous. I imagine with the number of workers in Blancardstown/Damastown from Maynooth, a morning and evening bus would probably be profitable on the route. I doubt Dublin bus even considered putting buses on the route.

Darragh29

I'm not surprised they are losing a fortune. I've a mate who used to work as a mechanic in Dublin Bus, here is an example of their working practices:

Task: Diagnose an electricial problem with a bus, suspected alternator failure.

(1) Panel beater/"body systems specialist" has to remove engine bay access panels from bus to allow access to alternator.

(2) Mechanic has to connect bus to diagnostic system to diagnose fault, which turns out to be the alternator.

(3) An electrician has to disconnect the alternator from the charging circuit on the bus, as this is "his job".

(4) The mechanic can then remove the bolts from the alternator that have secured the alternator to the engine block.

Alternator is now removed from the bus.

(5) Security have to have the component "security cleared" for release out of the building to be reconditioned, with associated form filling and additional beaurocracy.

(6) Now the "procurement/purchasing" department get involved in packaging the component and sending across the city to be reconditioned.

You can consider the installation of the component to be the reverse of the above. In an independent workshop, this component would be removed by a mechanic, sent off to be reconditioned or replaced and would be refitted by a mechanic, end of story.

grahamo

It all goes to show what a moronic shower we have running the country. The Govt's. left hand doesn't know what the right is doing. On the one hand they try to get more people using public transport and then decide to cut services. You couldn't f***ing make this up.
The one tactic the govt. has got right is the "divide & conquer" tactics. The average Joe on these boards is at each others throats blaming unions, public sector, the working man and anyone but the perpetrators of the mess the country is in. All Vitriole should be levelled at the gov't and their fatcat buddies!

antoinolachtnai

Edinburgh's buses have no general subsidy. The city-owned bus company actually pays a dividend to the city.

Overall, I think it is a good thing to spend money in providing good, uniform public transport throughout the city. It is important to get maximum value. For the 275m-odd we spend on city buses in Dublin, we should be getting an excellent service.

As it is, the bigger the subsidy we give, the less services we get.

There is a lot more written on the commuting/transport forum.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055460971

Victor

The Economist wrote: »

Their subsidy doesn't go to good use.

Assumming Maynooth Community Church doesn't do either transport or finance, could you back up that graph with numbers?

antoinolachtnai

I don't know much about that graph, but the figures are here I think.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4926523.ece

More immediately, we are now going to be paying a bigger subsidy, paying a higher fare and getting 10 percent fewer services than we got last year.

antoinolachtnai

Darragh29 wrote: »

I'm not surprised they are losing a fortune. I've a mate who used to work as a mechanic in Dublin Bus, here is an example of their working practices:

According to CEO Joe Meagher, Dublin Bus employs 36 maintenance staff for every 100 buses. Now I can understand why.

Time Magazine

Victor wrote: »

Assumming Maynooth Community Church doesn't do either transport or finance, could you back up that graph with numbers?

Lol. Taken from their Annual Reports. I can't remember whether they're adjusted for inflation or not.

AlekSmart

I'm not surprised they are losing a fortune. I've a mate who used to work as a mechanic in Dublin Bus, here is an example of their working practices:

Task: Diagnose an electricial problem with a bus, suspected alternator failure.

(1) Panel beater/"body systems specialist" has to remove engine bay access panels from bus to allow access to alternator.

(2) Mechanic has to connect bus to diagnostic system to diagnose fault, which turns out to be the alternator.

(3) An electrician has to disconnect the alternator from the charging circuit on the bus, as this is "his job".

(4) The mechanic can then remove the bolts from the alternator that have secured the alternator to the engine block.

Alternator is now removed from the bus.

(5) Security have to have the component "security cleared" for release out of the building to be reconditioned, with associated form filling and additional beaurocracy.

(6) Now the "procurement/purchasing" department get involved in packaging the component and sending across the city to be reconditioned.

You can consider the installation of the component to be the reverse of the above. In an independent workshop, this component would be removed by a mechanic, sent off to be reconditioned or replaced and would be refitted by a mechanic, end of story.

Im afraid I have to dispute the above version of things.

I Can only assume that Daragh29`s friend was employed some years ago in the old CIE days as the practices outlined there were comprehensively dispensed with over 20 years ago.

The CURRENT situation for that Alternator problem is exactly as described at the end of the post...ALL the appropriate work,including electrical fault diagnosis is carried out by the SAME Tradesperson.

However Daragh29`s post does demonstrate just how entrenched a VIEW can be in the public phsyche even though it ceased to be accurate some 2 decades past.
Multiskilling,retraining and ongoing multi-disciplinary development continues to be the day to day situation in Bus Atha liath maintenance AND it`s private sector "partners".

Incidentally,the exact same procedure was in place in Aer Lingus Maintenance and Engineering up until the early 1990`s and the ill fated TEAM takeover.

Its perhaps noteworthy that no amount of multi-skilling and efficiency improvements in that location could prevent the bad news last week about GulfAir`s sessation of contract with FLS,the successors of TEAM.

markpb

The Economist wrote: »

Their subsidy doesn't go to good use.

Your graph ignores congestion and the growth in the size of the city during the same time period. More cars in the same roads (look at a graph of irish car ownership over the same period) means more buses (and their drivers) sitting in traffic going nowhere while would-be passengers further downstream end up driving because the service is so woeful. Meanwhile, more estates are built in the suburbs and outer suburbs which DB now serve, making routes longer, slower and face even more congestion.

When faced with congestion and a city that barely gives any priority to buses, there are two options. Load more buses onto the same route (costing more) or have the same timetable bearing even less resemblance to reality.

Time Magazine

markpb wrote: »

Your graph ignores congestion and the growth in the size of the city during the same time period.

I think it subtly acknowledges both. Congestion is not a reason to increase PSOs by an order of five.

As for the "growth in the size of the city", I think what really matters here is the growth in commuting, which you'd expect to have a big impact on the blue line as well as on the orange one. Despite so many more people moving around, that line is practically horizontal. You have to ask why.

Carawaystick

Does the graph account for the almost complete replacement of Dublin bus's fleet with wheelchair accessible busses? these can't be too cheap.

Ireland's most successful public transport company also carry's Druggies and alcoholics can drink on their planes - as long as they buy on the plane, Michael O'Leary doesn't care too much.

thebman

Carawaystick wrote: »

Does the graph account for the almost complete replacement of Dublin bus's fleet with wheelchair accessible busses? these can't be too cheap.

Ireland's most successful public transport company also carry's Druggies and alcoholics can drink on their planes - as long as they buy on the plane, Michael O'Leary doesn't care too much.

I think the difference is your not supposed to do it on a bus. People don't light up on an Aer Lingus flight.

Or leave cans on the plane to roll over the floor or get sick on the floor (anytime I've travelled anyway) nor do they spill it all over the place leaving a stink on the plane.

Oh and perhaps most important, the plane can't pull over and kick them out and they occassionally land if a passenger is being too abusive on a flight to kick them off.

nesf

Húrin wrote: »

Good point. However, the PDs actually did manage to get their programme adopted (an unpopular programme, apparently), but the Greens did not. So it is surely clear that Fianna Fail are to blame? Or do you think there is a "FF can do no wrong" factor at play with some voters?

It's amazing how quickly people forget what the PDs wanted before they ever got into Government. Look at when they were founded and their programmes and ideas and now look at what's standard FF/FG positions in those areas, you'll find a lot of them very similar.

nesf

The Economist wrote: »

Their subsidy doesn't go to good use.

Source please. Anyone can do up a graph like that in Excel in 2 minutes etc et al. (I don't doubt that it's real from what I've seen of Dublin Bus figures but you should give a source if you're linking to a graph like that to pin your argument around)

Time Magazine

Carawaystick wrote: »

Does the graph account for the almost complete replacement of Dublin bus's fleet with wheelchair accessible busses? these can't be too cheap.

No. The subsidy figure excludes the free buses given to Dublin Bus. You can imagine what the graph would be like if you include capital subsidies.

nesf wrote: »

Source please. Anyone can do up a graph like that in Excel in 2 minutes etc et al. (I don't doubt that it's real from what I've seen of Dublin Bus figures but you should give a source if you're linking to a graph like that to pin your argument around)

I've already given the source.

Victor

The Economist wrote: »

Lol. Taken from their Annual Reports. I can't remember whether they're adjusted for inflation or not.

The full data doesn't seem to be in the published reports (whatever about material provided on a shareholder-company basis).

nesf wrote: »

Source please. Anyone can do up a graph like that in Excel in 2 minutes etc et al. (I don't doubt that it's real from what I've seen of Dublin Bus figures but you should give a source if you're linking to a graph like that to pin your argument around)

OK, The Economist has given me a plausible source for the graph, but can't show the data. We will put away that stick, but remember it for the next time.

Carawaystick wrote: »

Does the graph account for the almost complete replacement of Dublin bus's fleet with wheelchair accessible busses? these can't be too cheap.

Possibly an issue, but we have the peace process to consider.

Indeed, it isn't so important the amount of the subsidy, but under what headings is the subsidy. Indeed a breakdown of all departmental payments to the CIÉ group would be most interesting.

Time Magazine

Victor wrote: »

The full data doesn't seem to be in the published reports.

The data which I provided is publicly available. The ESRI provides subsidy and passenger numbers (page 3 of PDF) until 2005 while the 2006 and 2007 BÁC Annual Reports are here and here.

antoinolachtnai

markpb wrote: »

Your graph ignores congestion and the growth in the size of the city during the same time period. More cars in the same roads (look at a graph of irish car ownership over the same period) means more buses (and their drivers) sitting in traffic going nowhere while would-be passengers further downstream end up driving because the service is so woeful. Meanwhile, more estates are built in the suburbs and outer suburbs which DB now serve, making routes longer, slower and face even more congestion.

When faced with congestion and a city that barely gives any priority to buses, there are two options. Load more buses onto the same route (costing more) or have the same timetable bearing even less resemblance to reality.

This may all be true, but Dublin Bus hasn't vigorously raised this as an issue for some time. According to the 2007 annual report, DB seemed happy enough that this problem was being resolved by the QBN program. As late as July this year, a senior representative of Dublin Bus told a radio station that enough was being done to implement traffic priority in Dublin City Centre.

Re the graph, it does not appear to include the capital subsidy, only the operating subsidy.

Victor

Rescaling the graph, with year 2000 as base 100 doesn't look quite so bad (I'm guessing at the numbers, will read up on the links The Economist just gave).

nesf

Victor wrote: »

Rescaling the graph, with year 2000 as base 100 doesn't look quite so bad (I'm guessing at the numbers, will read up on the links The Economist just gave).

Eh, if you take the base year in the middle of any time series like that, of course it will "look better" because of the visual effect of the lines crossing each other. To anyone trained to read them, the two graphs are identical and one doesn't look better than the other since the figures are identical. The base 1998 version gives a more accurate picture of the inflation that's been going on with respect to the subsidy.

Grudaire

Has anyone seen what the subsity is abroad to give a fair comparison

And for those who think privitisation is the answer
http://uninews.unimelb.edu.au/view.php?articleID=3294

Victor

nesf wrote: »

Eh, if you take the base year in the middle of any time series like that, of course it will "look better" because of the visual effect of the lines crossing each other. To anyone trained to read them, the two graphs are identical and one doesn't look better than the other since the figures are identical. The base 1998 version gives a more accurate picture of the inflation that's been going on with respect to the subsidy.

Alternatively, the base picked was low or even extraordinarily low.

One thing that has come to mind is theat they have moved from a mixed fleet to a nearly all double-decker fleet - only 72 out of 1148 vehicles are now single deck.

antoinolachtnai

Since the fleet has bigger capacity, you would expect it to carry more passengers. The newness of the fleet should yield better reliability and lower maintenance costs.

Remember, there were fare increases as well. It would make more sense to draw the graph of total operating costs (which is fares + subsidy - profit) and compare that to the passengers carried or kilometres driven. This will also take into account an allowance for the capital subsidy (which was 13m last year).

There is no point in comparing subsidies directly, because that won't give you any insight into the level of services in that city.

Best you can do is compare the price per km of operating buses in a number of cities:

Massey has done this in table 4 of this report.

http://www.esri.ie/UserFiles/publications/20070328122524/QEC2007Spr_SA_Massey.pdf

He also subtracts out the amount of this that is attributable to congestion.

Note that the UK prices would be a lot lower at present because of the decline in sterling.

If you feel like drawing graphs, it's also worth looking at the amount of capital that's now invested compared to a few years ago.

Re Melbourne link - I don't understand the point of this. Melbourne has three times the population of Ireland, yet the cost of running their transport system (eur 600m) is less than 2.5 times the cost of running our bus system alone (about 280m in 2007). (That's not to say they don't have problems, but on the face of it, overspending is not one of them.)

snaps

over 300 jobs going, routes being cut and they still put up fares by 10% when fuel costs are dropping all the time.

Thank god for private bus firms.

K4t

I heard a Dublin Bus representative on the radio saying that only Bus drivers were being let go. No admin would be let go. Right. :rolleyes:

djpbarry

Article from Ciarán Cuffe on the subject in today's Times; some pretty simple initiatives that could be easily implemented:

DUBLIN BUS requires radical reform to meet the needs of bus users. The company made a profit of €4.7 million in 2007, but lost €10 million last year and will lose €31 million this year unless action is taken. Last week management chose the easier option of service cutbacks instead of the reforms required to modernise the company.
...
Although most quality bus corridors are successful, many routes meander around the city. The number 17 takes an hour and 20 minutes to travel from Blackrock to the terminus in Rialto. En route it travels six miles to reach Dundrum, a journey of only three miles as the crow flies.
...
The Dublin Transportation Office has computer modelling that show the origins and destinations of the journeys that Dubliners make. This information should be used to transform Dublin Bus routes into a network that better serves the city’s needs.
...
An over-supply of bus stops also complicates matters. Placing bus stop every 250 meters slows down buses. Fewer bus stops might add a minute or two to the walk to the stop, but would reduce bus journey times.
...
Timetables at bus stops state when the bus should leave the terminus. Instead, they should inform you when buses will depart from the bus stop. In other cities, buses pause for a moment along their route if required in order to stick to schedule.
...
A free bus map would help. The printed map of the Dublin Bus network costs €3 and is hard to obtain. A map showing all public transport including Luas and rail would attract more users. The Dublin Bus website is searchable by bus number and destination, but it is left to a private site – www.justroutes.com – to permit you to choose your starting point and destination and find the bus you need.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0122/1232474672081.html