Passenger Profiles

HonalD

What type of passenger profiles do posters think Dublin Bus should be aiming for?

I've noticed that to divert commuters from cars, cheap prices aren't the main driving force. So do you think DB should stick to those without cars or have a service for those "with" cars to lose........................Can a public transport service be provided for both types of passengers?

Cookie_Monster

Original Post:probably a bit racist and will get me in trouble

Edit:
DB should be targeting people who have all day to get where ever they want.

They are not (currently) capable of a level of service good enough to tempt people out of there cars as it will take longer and be less relyable to do so.

KC61

HonalD wrote: »

What type of passenger profiles do posters think Dublin Bus should be aiming for?

I've noticed that to divert commuters from cars, cheap prices aren't the main driving force. So do you think DB should stick to those without cars or have a service for those "with" cars to lose........................Can a public transport service be provided for both types of passengers?

They need to focus on providing direct high frequency services along each QBC that do not deviate from it and which operate with standard interval clockface departures.

This has been introduced with routes such as the 4/4A, 140, 151, 145, 128 but needs to be rolled out across the network.

This is the only way that many people will be enticed from their cars.

Aside from these services there is always a need for the other routes that operate a more local service but which do not need to be at the same frequency.

The real problem comes with orbital services, where most people's journeys do not have the same start and finish points. It is far more difficult to match bus routes to passenger journeys in such circumstances, hence the need to route services through major centres.

It is perfectly possible to serve both markets, but the company need to focus on delivering a quality product before anything else. To do that requires all of the local authorities on board to deliver the bus priority needed for a consistent service.

_Kaiser_

As a car owner (and I've posted most of these before), I'd want to see the following before I'd even consider a change:

- Frequent departures and reliable (ie: on time - not late, not early) services.

- Comfortable buses (ie: not jammed in like sardines, filthy, soaking wet, freezing cold, or roasting in the summer).

- Buses that go where *I* want to go, not what suits DB.
The obsession with "An Lar" would need to change. I shouldn't have to go via the city centre to get from Blanchardstown to Coolock for example - yes I could go via Finglas and Ballymun but that'd mean 3 buses rather than 2.
I also don't want to have to spend half my day getting to where I need to go either.

- Remove the scumbags that inhabit far too many of the upper decks.

- Integrated ticketing across all services available in the Dublin area.

- Value for money.

KC61

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

As a car owner (and I've posted most of these before), I'd want to see the following before I'd even consider a change:

- Frequent departures and reliable (ie: on time - not late, not early) services.

- Comfortable buses (ie: not jammed in like sardines, filthy, soaking wet, freezing cold, or roasting in the summer).

- Buses that go where *I* want to go, not what suits DB.
The obsession with "An Lar" would need to change. I shouldn't have to go via the city centre to get from Blanchardstown to Coolock for example - yes I could go via Finglas and Ballymun but that'd mean 3 buses rather than 2.
I also don't want to have to spend half my day getting to where I need to go either.

- Remove the scumbags that inhabit far too many of the upper decks.

- Integrated ticketing across all services available in the Dublin area.

- Value for money.

Blanchardstown to Coolock is already 2 buses not 3:
220 to Finglas or Ballymun and then either the 103 to Kilmore or the 17A to Coolock.

Again the problem with orbital services is how many people want to go and from the same locations - nowhere near as easy to plan as with services to/from the city.

_Kaiser_

KC61 wrote: »

Blanchardstown to Coolock is already 2 buses not 3:
220 to Finglas or Ballymun and then either the 103 to Kilmore or the 17A to Coolock..

Actually it also required a 27 from Northside SC to the end of the Glin Road/Clonshaugh

HonalD

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

- Comfortable buses (ie: not jammed in like sardines, filthy, soaking wet, freezing cold, or roasting in the summer).

- Remove the scumbags that inhabit far too many of the upper decks.

- Integrated ticketing across all services available in the Dublin area.

- Value for money.

I think you are not entirely worried about price - to "remove the scumbags" does this mean by pricing them off public transport?

IMO it is a fasinating topic - price tolerance vs. "comfortable" environment on public transport!

KC61

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Actually it also required a 27 from Northside SC to the end of the Glin Road/Clonshaugh

That however reinforces my point. How many people would be doing that precise journey? There may well be people going to Clonshaugh Ind Estate or to Coolock, but not necessarily to Priorswood.

The best that could happen would be perhaps a Blanchardstown-Kilbarrack bus formed of a combined 220 and 17A. from which you could transfer to a 27, but expecting Dublin Bus to provide buses for your precise journey is asking too much.

At the end of the day it is not possible to meet every orbital requirement - it is far easier with radial routes to/from the city.

_Kaiser_

HonalD wrote: »

I think you are not entirely worried about price - to "remove the scumbags" does this mean by pricing them off public transport?

IMO it is a fasinating topic - price tolerance vs. "comfortable" environment on public transport!

No you're right. Changes like what I suggested won't happen overnight, nor will they provided free of charge! Actually, if they standardised what used to be the "standard" €1.75/80 fare to a flat €2 and simplified the others while they were at it, that might be a start. Better yet, increase the incentives to move away from cash to pre-paid cards entirely.

I - and I'd say most people - wouldn't mind paying fares that continue to increase anyway IF we could see that this money was being reinvested and genuine quantifiable changes were being made to the service.

EDIT: You have to remember what you're up against. I have a 2.0L TDI 06 Passat. It's big, it's comfortable, it has climate control, a stereo that I can listen to what *I* want to on, not what someone with an overly loud MP3 player or the driver themselves want.
I don't have to wait on my car to arrive. I don't have to stand/sit in the rain or sweltering heat. I can adjust my route or departure time as I want and/or subject to traffic conditions... AND it's often faster. I could do Blanch - Cherrywood in an hour leaving at 7am a few years back (going via the quays/pearse st/N11). The same journey by public transport involved a commuter train, DART and shuttle bus and even then I'd just barely make my 9am start!

To even convince me to try the bus with the service as it is today just isn't gonna happen!

As for the scumbags.. more policing of the well known "problem" routes (the 77, the 27 etc) both by Gardai and DB's own staff would be an idea with a zero tolerance attitude. Why should your average member of the public have to put up with some scumbag drinking cans or smoking etc down the back of the bus, especially when said scumbag has probably underpaid anyway!

Stop the bus and just feck them off it I'd say. We've gone too far down the PC road I think when we're overly concerned about the "rights" of people like that at the expense of the many.

_Kaiser_

KC61 wrote: »

That however reinforces my point. How many people would be doing that precise journey? There may well be people going to Clonshaugh Ind Estate or to Coolock, but not necessarily to Priorswood.

The best that could happen would be perhaps a Blanchardstown-Kilbarrack bus formed of a combined 220 and 17A. from which you could transfer to a 27, but expecting Dublin Bus to provide buses for your precise journey is asking too much.

At the end of the day it is not possible to meet every orbital requirement - it is far easier with radial routes to/from the city.

I fully agree that DB can't be expected to provide for EVERY passenger's individual journey need.. clearly that's just not realistic. But there ARE many journeys out there that aren't catered for at all. How about Blanch to the airport for example? (I'm sure there's many others too all over the city).

It would be nice as well if DB and staff realised that Dublin is now a 24/7 city. That means providing services (albeit reduced certainly) all night, or starting at usual times on Sundays etc. For the bus to be accepted (and used by current car owners) it has to be convenient.

AlekSmart

It would be nice as well if DB and staff realised that Dublin is now a 24/7 city. That means providing services (albeit reduced certainly) all night, or starting at usual times on Sundays etc.

This is one recurring hed rerring that needs redressing.

Since 2000 the standard DB contract of employment for drivers allows for full 24 hour as required deployment.
The company were well advanced with the proposal to operate the 746 Dunlaoire-Dublin Airport on a 24 hour basis,however "something happened" and the approval application either never materialized or was refused.

There were also advanced plans to operate the 7 Route on a 24 Hour basis once the Rock Road QBC became fully operational......No idea why this has not happened.

Most certainly DB needed to have moved on from Nitelink to a network of 24 Hr "normal" trunk routes operating on a flat-fare (eg €2.20) basis in both directions augmented by a Nitelink Express during weekend`s or events.

However this type of thinking is not at all valued by the Department of Transport who far prefer people to be in bed before 11.30 in order to be up for 06..00 Mass the next morning.

It is somewhat sobering to realize that the initial element of the current disputed "Survival Plan" was introduced without a murmour of dissent when DB removed the Mon-Thurs Nitelink some weeks back.

KC61

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

I fully agree that DB can't be expected to provide for EVERY passenger's individual journey need.. clearly that's just not realistic. But there ARE many journeys out there that aren't catered for at all. How about Blanch to the airport for example? (I'm sure there's many others too all over the city).

It would be nice as well if DB and staff realised that Dublin is now a 24/7 city. That means providing services (albeit reduced certainly) all night, or starting at usual times on Sundays etc. For the bus to be accepted (and used by current car owners) it has to be convenient.

Blanchardstown to the Airport is operated by UrBus and as a result Dublin Bus are precluded from operating such a service. Incidentally UrBus have just introduced a more frequent timetable on the route with early morning departures. www.urbus.ie

With radial routes to/from the city along the major corridors there is always good loadings in either direction because people will want to go to locations along that corridor. In other words there are sufficient similar journeys to warrant high frequency. When it comes to orbital routes, it is far more difficult to suit everyone as everyone's individual journey tends to be different! Therefore the best that the bus companies can do is to provide a service linking major conurbations via the route that will deliver consistent loadings. Hence the 75 routes via Stillorgan, Dundrum, Ballinteer, Rathfarnham and Firhouse rather than via the M50, as it picks up/sets down passengers all along the route.

There are 3 orbital routes in south Dublin, the 17, 18 and 75, three in the west, 76/A/B, 210 and 239, and five in north Dublin, 17A, 102, 103, 104, 220 (I'm excluding the 105 as that's a college bus), plus UrBus from Castleknock to Swords. All of them intersect with the main radial routes along the way. Now I think there is scope for perhaps extending the 103 to the Airport, and perhaps merging the 220 with the 104, thus linking north Dublin as a through route. However, beyond that I'm not sure what else you expect Dublin Bus to do? Many of these routes operate at a reasonably high peaktime frequency to cope with loads. As I say, virtually every individual orbital journey that people take is different and as such it is very difficult to come up with a bus route that satisfies everyone.

At the end of the day there are numerous journeys (mainly orbital) for which the car is always going to be more suited. Public transport can try to deliver on the more popular routes, but you cannot expect it to do everything.

I agree about operating hours - at the very least each corridor should have a service arriving into the city for before 8am on Sundays.

mikemac

This isn't a rant.

I live by a fast, frequent service and now they have started introducing those new modern buses which is great too. Not a huge difference between bus types but nice to see.

Fares are reasonable and it's a service that suits me.

Dublin Bus need to do something about the scumbag element on the buses, it's just going to turn away passengers. The Luas line now has contracted a secuirty company, the same crowd as Irish rail.

Can Dublin Bus not do the same? We don't need security on all buses and at all times. That would cost too much.
Just target certain buses and at certain times.
Hint: It's not in the morning when most people are going to work

It'd improve service and surely it wouldn't cost that much. Until the situation improves, I ain't using the bus in the evenings. Just isn't good enough and that's me lost as a customer, not that management realy care.
Also, it'd let the driver concentrate on driving and not putting them in situations they couldn't handle but security could do easily.

KC61

mikemac wrote: »

This isn't a rant.

I live by a fast, frequent service and now they have started introducing those new modern buses which is great too. Not a huge difference between bus types but nice to see.

Fares are reasonable and it's a service that suits me.

Dublin Bus need to do something about the scumbag element on the buses, it's just going to turn away passengers. The Luas line now has contracted a secuirty company, the same crowd as Irish rail.

Can Dublin Bus not do the same? We don't need security on all buses and at all times. That would cost too much.
Just target certain buses and at certain times.
Hint: It's not in the morning when most people are going to work

It'd improve service and surely it wouldn't cost that much. Until the situation improves, I ain't using the bus in the evenings. Just isn't good enough and that's me lost as a customer, not that management realy care.
Also, it'd let the driver concentrate on driving and not putting them in situations they couldn't handle but security could do easily.

My personal view on this is that surely this is more of a society problem than one specific to Dublin Bus?

There are serious issues with some parts of the city centre near certain bus termini with illegal activities (I refuse to use the term anti-social behaviour) - the boardwalk at Eden Quay is one - hence the Tallaght routes were moved to start in Ringsend and the 15 group replaced them; Aston Quay also suffers from it. Are Dublin Bus supposed to solve all of these issues? Surely this is a far wider issue. Every Dublin Bus is fitted with multiple CCTV cameras - short of plain clothes gardai travelling on buses (which does on occasion happen) what else can they do? To be quite honest these things are a much wider reflection of the society that we live in.

KC61

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

You have to remember what you're up against. I have a 2.0L TDI 06 Passat. It's big, it's comfortable, it has climate control, a stereo that I can listen to what *I* want to on, not what someone with an overly loud MP3 player or the driver themselves want.
I don't have to wait on my car to arrive. I don't have to stand/sit in the rain or sweltering heat. I can adjust my route or departure time as I want and/or subject to traffic conditions... AND it's often faster. I could do Blanch - Cherrywood in an hour leaving at 7am a few years back (going via the quays/pearse st/N11). The same journey by public transport involved a commuter train, DART and shuttle bus and even then I'd just barely make my 9am start!

To even convince me to try the bus with the service as it is today just isn't gonna happen!

For that sort of journey I wouldn't even start to try to suggest that you use public transport as it would be nonsensical. There is a motorway linking the two locations directly, and of course it is going to be faster by car, and going through town at that hour as you encounter little traffic.

By public transport, and at that hour I'd use the bus as they meet closely in town (39/145) it's probably doable in 80-90 minutes.

But again, if a bus service were to operate that route, for it to be remotely viable it would have to leave the M50 at each exit to serve some stops en route before rejoining the motorway. Therefore even then it would not compete with the car.

antoinolachtnai

mikemac wrote: »

Dublin Bus need to do something about the scumbag element on the buses, it's just going to turn away passengers. The Luas line now has contracted a secuirty company, the same crowd as Irish rail.

Broadly,

- Irish people's expectation of getting a high quality product or service have risen across the board (doesn't matter whether you are unemployed or rich and doesn't matter whether you are selling breakfasts or phones). (Price is also becoming an issue now.)

- Public transport as a whole has not delivered improvements to meet this rising expectation.

=> Problem.

KC61

Perhaps part of the solution would be to suspend child fares after a certain time, say 9pm?

rx8

mikemac wrote: »

.

Dublin Bus need to do something about the scumbag element on the buses, it's just going to turn away passengers. The Luas line now has contracted a secuirty company, the same crowd as Irish rail.

The penalties and fines etc.,need to be increased along with a no tolerance approach by the authorities....what do you think will happen to you if you pr**k about on a bus in France or Germany..? You'll do 6 months at least.
Over here you'll be very unlucky even to get arrested and end up with a small fine.
We need to have a dedicated transport police to ensure the the safety of all commuters.

As an aside.. Dublin Bus had 7 scumbags in court last week who were caught red-handed by the under-cover smoking unit, 7 Inspectors had to turn up,including 2 on rest-days.
6 of them got off without fines,just €50 costs and 1 got off totally scott-free.

Why would any-body want to travel on a bus until we get rid of this type of passenger

markpb

rx8 wrote: »

As an aside.. Dublin Bus had 7 scumbags in court last week who were caught red-handed by the under-cover smoking unit, 7 Inspectors had to turn up,including 2 on rest-days. 6 of them got off without fines,just €50 costs and 1 got off totally scott-free. Why would any-body want to travel on a bus until we get rid of this type of passenger

And likewise, why would DB bother to do anything about them when the judicial system doesn't give a rats ass?

_Kaiser_

KC61 wrote: »

For that sort of journey I wouldn't even start to try to suggest that you use public transport as it would be nonsensical. There is a motorway linking the two locations directly, and of course it is going to be faster by car, and going through town at that hour as you encounter little traffic.

By public transport, and at that hour I'd use the bus as they meet closely in town (39/145) it's probably doable in 80-90 minutes.

But again, if a bus service were to operate that route, for it to be remotely viable it would have to leave the M50 at each exit to serve some stops en route before rejoining the motorway. Therefore even then it would not compete with the car.

I agree with you that a lot of the time the bus simply will not be able to compete with the car on anything beyond a relatively simple A-B journey.

But the Blanch - Cherrywood example I used is precisely the reason I gave up on public transport altogether and went for a car. Of course, once you have a car, you very quickly become used to the convenience, comfort and flexibility it offers and that means it's going to be very hard to tempt you back to public transport.

Sticking with Blanch (as I lived there for several years ), I often would have gotten a bus in to town for a night out. The 39 was timetabled around the every 12-15 minutes mark but FAR too often was I left standing for 30 mins upwards then 2/3 would arrive together.

In peak times you could blame the (then) crazy situation where the bus had to drive in to Blanch SC, load/unload, then drive on, turn around at KFC/AIB and then negotiate its way out again (I don't know how much moving the terminus helped, but I'd assume it has as there's now dedicated bus lanes on both sides and on the approaches)......... but that still doesn't explain off-peak problems.

There may well be what DB/drivers consider reasons - shift changes etc - but the travelling public only care about why their bus is late - and surely as a public service, the public need should come first?

Anyway, the end result of this was I ultimately decided it wasn't worth the hassle or wasted time (to say nothing of getting home again at the end of the night or the occasional trouble on nightlinks!), so I'd drive in, park the car in a multistory and just not drink (I can't handle it anymore anyway - getting old! )

That was a simple A-B journey along a major route but even that couldn't be done right, to say nothing of the other issues I raised above. Is it any wonder then that so many people have given up on the bus and public transport as a whole?

KC61

You raise a good point, but again part of the problem that Dublin Bus face is that for over a year they have had plans for redesigning the network in the Blanchardstown area put on hold by the Department due to licensing issues, involving (in the Department's unique view!) the potential for unfair competition between Dublin Bus route 37 and URbus on the Castleknock Road.

I fully agree with you - the 39 has an unachievable schedule, but this was to be fully addressed as part of the network review.

The off-peak problems that you describe would be a knock-on from the peak. If a bus is late arriving at the outer terminus, then it has to work back into town and then the driver is late. To compensate, he can either have a shortened break and be paid overtime, or he can take his full break and therefore a later bus is affected.

Similarly, the driver who was to take over the bus in the example above will be left standing in Hawkins Street awaiting the bus! Hence you can have dropped departures as controllers attempt to get buses and drivers to where they should be!

It is a twin edged sword - yes the public deserve a service, but also would you (as a driver) want to be forced to work overtime every day?

That is the reality of managing a bus network, and yes I agree the schedule should have been changed several years back, but when the Department refuses to sanction new schedules that resolve the problems with the running time what are DB to do?

antoinolachtnai

If reports are to be believed, Dublin Bus devotes a lot of time and attention to redesigning routes in areas that are served by other operators.

They seem to spend a lot less time attention redesigning routes in areas which are not served by other operators.

KC61

With all due respect Antoin, what was asked for in Blanchardstown was replacing an existing service (the 237) with an extended 37 and giving the people in Carpenterstown (that do not have any private bus near them) a much improved link to the Blanchardstown Centre.

How anyone in their right mind could consider that one mile along Castleknock Road where the 37 and UrBus intersect a competition issue is beyond me.

I think that you are being rather unfair to Dublin Bus - there have been numerous changes that have been in other areas. The 4/4a, 128, 151, 140, 145, 92 all relatively new routes, and don't apparently interfere with any private operation, nor does the extended 102, nor the 74/74A nor the improved service on the 75.

antoinolachtnai

Why did moving the terminus of the Tallaght buses from Eden Quay to Ringsend Depot require payment of EUR 269k in disturbance money? It was only about a mile's drive, after all.

Did Dublin Bus make any effort to actually resolve the Blanchardstown issue by negotiation? Or did they just embark straight onto a campaign of megaphone diplomacy?

You present the facts a certain way. Are you certain that you are presenting the full facts of the matter? Was there ever any instance of disturbance before between DB and Urbus?

Does Dublin Bus have any evidence for there being no question of competition, or is it just an assertion?

The number of routes that have been changed are very few and the number that have not been changed and need major revisions is very great.

There will always be someone else to blame.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Why did moving the terminus of the Tallaght buses from Eden Quay to Ringsend Depot require payment of EUR 269k in disturbance money? It was only about a mile's drive, after all.

Did Dublin Bus make any effort to actually resolve the Blanchardstown issue by negotiation? Or did they just embark straight onto a campaign of megaphone diplomacy?

You present the facts a certain way. Are you certain that you are presenting the full facts of the matter? Was there ever any instance of disturbance before between DB and Urbus?

Does Dublin Bus have any evidence for there being no question of competition, or is it just an assertion?

The number of routes that have been changed are very few and the number that have not been changed and need major revisions is very great.

There will always be someone else to blame.

My interpretation is as a passenger and long time observer of the public transport network, particularly the buses, in Dublin, rather than yours as a competitor.

The Blanchardstown issue was raised in Dail Eireann (not by Dublin Bus) by politicians and the official answer given there. That is where I am getting my information from. I am not aware of previous issues between UrBus and Dublin Bus. The section of route in question is from Ashtown Park Gate to Laurel Lodge, which is a small portion of the UrBus service to the Airport and Swords and I would be very surprised if someone along that section of road going to Blanchardstown S.C. would take the 37 if a UrBus were coming as the 37 would take them all over Carpenterstown. It just strikes me of the Department being overly cautious.

The issue of disturbance money is not relevant to this discussion - that is an internal matter for Dublin Bus - I may not agree with it at all - but that is another discussion.

In fairness you too present "facts" in a particular way. You made a claim that very few improvements were made in recent years where private operators did not operate, and I've given you 8 new routes and several timetable improvements introduced in the last two years that were in areas not served by private buses. You've said elsewhere that there is no network map, which there has been for almost 20 years (either in local guide form or as a full map).

Of course the route applications that are turned down gain publicity, because people are as a result (in general) not getting an improved bus service which they (as taxpayers) should be entitled to.

Don't get me wrong I do think that there is a place for private operators - and indeed yourself (Swords Express) and other operators such as Aircoach, Flybus and UrBus all operate a good niche service (as indeed did Circle Line with their morning and evening peak operation). But that being said, I think that the public are still getting a raw deal when the whole licensing regime focuses on who should operate a service, rather than what services are required. At the moment, individual operators are free to effectively take a packet of crayons from their box and devise new routes, rather than a licensing authority designing a network and franchising the routes out.

At the end of the day all I care about is getting a bus service that people deserve. Descending into the blame game is not constructive. But, I would strongly suggest that most of the blame lies with the politicians and the Department for leaving the status quo with regard to legislation for far far too long.

antoinolachtnai

Then you are speaking without know the full facts in relation to Blanchardstown in relation to either in terms or what happened on the ground or in terms of the economics.

I am perfectly aware that there is a map of Dublin Bus routes and I never said there wasn't. That is not the point I made. I don't know any private operator who can afford to devise new routes 'with a packet of crayons', or in a haphazard, careless way as you are implying. You are just being insulting.

KC61

I don't mean it as an insult to anyone - what I am saying is that there is no joined up thinking with regard to the full bus network. Each individual operator is devising new routes on its own. My "crayon" comment was meant in that sense. And I certainly do not exclude Dublin Bus from my criticism in that regard.

A coherent integrated bus network is what the city needs - and the sooner it happens the better, because at the moment the consumer (in some cases) is losing out.

That is what should be the paramount factor here - not who operates a service.

No matter which side of the fence you are on, it is irrefutable that the current licensing process is not working, and that passengers are the losers in certain areas.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Then you are speaking without know the full facts in relation to Blanchardstown in relation to either in terms or what happened on the ground or in terms of the economics.

What I know is (from Dail questions and answers) that Dublin Bus put in an application for a complete redesign of the network in Blanchardstown, part of which was the extension of the 37 from Carpenterstown to the Blanchardstown Centre.

The latter was refused on the grounds that it would unfairly compete with an existing private operator (which has to be Urbus as there is no other in the area).

Therefore effectively the Department is saying that an extended 37 to Blanchardstown Centre via Laurel Lodge, Carpenterstown and Riverwood (a fairly long deviation) would be unfair competition to a service that takes a direct route from Castleknock to Blanchardstown Centre via Blanchardstown Village?

That is a fair inference I would say? Unless you know different....

The net result is that people in Carpenterstown who currently have a (roughly) hourly connection to/from the Blanchardstown S.C. courtesy of the 237 are not getting the planned improvement to every 15/20 minutes via the 37.

AlekSmart

Did Dublin Bus make any effort to actually resolve the Blanchardstown issue by negotiation? Or did they just embark straight onto a campaign of megaphone diplomacy?

I`m unsure that there was/is a Blanchardstown Issue for Dublin Bus per se.

There most certainly is such for the Department of Transport who for their own reasons see many such issues througout Dublin at the moment.

This "Interpretation" of the 1932 Road Transport Act dates back to 2000 it seems and relies on the expert advice of the then Attorney General.

That remains the standing interpretation upon which the Department bases its decisions in matters Public Transport.

However with both Swords Express and Urbus having links to the Èirebus group it may perhaps be unwise to enter into an "I Know that you don`t know but he knows more" situation.

I am struck by KC 61`s knowledgable and balanced posts and I know that his/her posts generally reflect a balanced viewpoint from a PT USERS perspective.

Whilst I am a Dublin Bus employee,I have no problem with accepting criticism of my company`s many percieved failings but I stop short of accepting a thesis of some body-corporate made up of innefficient evil Managers conspiring to do-down the little man.

The somewhat more mundane reality of Dublin Bus management is of them being required to be all things to all men/women when it comes to making/taking any form of strategic decisions regarding their own network.

For me the absolute proof of that came in the wake of the Euro Changeover when some VERY simple and much needed rationalization of its Fare-Stage system was blind-sided by the Department of Transport for the flimsisest of reasons.

That level of intereference was then compounded by the Company being required to offer two free-fare Saturdays to compensate customers for the supposed effrontery.....That little one-act play merited at least a Ministerial resignation or even a Departmental Secretary General`s demotion...did it happen......not a hope.

I sure do not expect Antoin,as the principle of a public service which he sees as competing with Dublin Bus,to come on and wax lyrical in praise of ANYTHING my employer and my colleagues attempt to do in relation to providing a public service.
However inferring that KC61 is being insulting by making a reference to a very obvious deficiency in Government policy is a bit OTT I believe....viz-

:

At the moment, individual operators are free to effectively take a packet of crayons from their box and devise new routes, rather than a licensing authority designing a network and franchising the routes out.

Seems an accurate enough summation to me.....