Budget (supplementary) 2009

murphaph

http://www.budget.gov.ie/2009SupApril09/SummaryofSupplementaryBudgetMeasuresPolicyChanges.html

No mention of anything significant for public transport at all. The Interconnector lives another day

Amtmann

Some figures here: http://www.budget.gov.ie/2009SupApril09/SummaryofSupplementaryBudgetMeasuresPolicyChanges.html#CapitalExpenditure

Chris_533976

From that site -

Transport

Reduction in national roads maintenance grants to the National Roads Authority; and reduction in Exchequer subvention payments to CIÉ for provision of public transport services. €11m

Transport – €300 million savings, including a reduction of €150 million or 8% in investment in roads. In 2009, this reduction is applied mainly to regional and local roads. Expenditure on national roads is substantially contractually committed to allow for the on-time and on-budget completion of the inter-urban motorway network by end 2010 as promised. There will also be some deferrals and rescheduling of public transport projects.

Again, €150million is a single medium scheme.

What I still think will happen is that no new government funded projects (apart from Castleisland) will start until the Interurbans are finished. The four PPPs are still being pushed, but no infomration on them tho.

Gruffalo

He did say that money would be saved by virtue of tenders coming in cheaper now that costs have fallen.

Sponge Bob

The Government decided on reductions of €315 million on the earlier Estimate for the Department of Transport in the Supplementary Budget:

€15 million saving on current expenditure
€300 million saving on capital expenditure


The €15 million reduction in current expenditure will be in the following areas:

A reduction of €5 million on national road maintenance, bringing the revised provision to €44 million

A reduction of €10 million in public transport service payments to CIE, the revised provision being €303 million.

The €300 million reduction in capital expenditure will be in the following areas:

There will be a €150 million reduction in the capital provision for regional and local roads so that the overall expenditure allocation for regional and local roads will now be €448m (€332m capital and €126m current).


(25% off maintenance = 33% more potholes -SB)

Revised grant allocations will be issued to local authorities in the coming days.

The capital provision for public transport will be reduced by €150 million to €630 million.

(20% off Rail Spending - SB)

The reduced capital allocation for public transport will result in some delay in the implementation of a number of projects that are still in the planning stages. Planning and design work on these projects will continue but the timing of procurement and implementation will remain dependent on the availability of funding in future years.


The capital allocation for national roads is unaffected. This is because all but €50 million of the €1.44 billion is already contractually committed.

Amtmann

Mention was made during the minister's speech of the proposed infrastructure bond. Where, do people think, stands the Interconnector, Metro North and the M20?

Chris_533976

They're different I think as they are PPPs. My understanding (which could well be wrong) is that the infrastructure bond would fund Goverment funded projects, not PPPs. I realise that PPPs do cost the gov a certain amount every year, but not as much as a gov-funded scheme.

What I just said could be bull**** though.

Amtmann

DoT Press Release: http://www.transport.ie/pressRelease.aspx?Id=82

graduate

(25% off maintenance = 33% more potholes -SB)

Revised grant allocations will be issued to local authorities in the coming days.

Tender prices might be 10% less, so the NRA maintenance cut might not lead to very much less activity and the effects of the local authority cuts may be less.

mysterious

To be honest,

I'd rather a small enfield type bypass built for Claregalway for now, and focus on the badly needed Northern M20 Scheme, especially since the Adare bypass is incoporated into it.

I'm putting priority for this, because.
A N20 has got no attention in the last developments plans. Adare has been crying out for a bypass for the last 20years. The amount of deaths on the N20 is a embarrasment. From Croom to Buttevant is at a unacceptable standard. The road is too dangerous, windy and narrow.

There is no major bottleneck on the N17/N18 if they go ahead with a Claregalway bypass (which is needed now regardless if the M17 goes ahead or not) Anyway Gort is now been bypassed.

So with the way everything is been strained, could we not focus on one scheme on the M20. Seriously the M20 has always been pushed over smaller schemes such as the N4, N9, N5 and N17 in the last few years.

What do you all reckon?

Sponge Bob

In the next round of cutbacks that would be equitable , yes . Very little needs doing to Claregalway to relieve it just as Enfield and Kinnegad were relieved pending their motorway bypasses.

murphaph

We're in a national emergency to all intents and purposes. **** Claregalway and divert every penny to Dublin NOW! Dublin has and will continue to be the beating heart of our economy for ever. It is what has made all these rural schemes possible-don't strangle it when it most needs our national collective help!

BluntGuy

I'm seriously questioning our ability to pay for projects like Interconnector and Metro North.

But they are both (in particular Interconnector) needed urgently, and if possible without seriously damaging the economy, money must be found for them.

I am not sure where that money is going to come from. The NRA won't be enjoying its current generous budgetry allowances come 2011 - that's for sure. Maybe that's a start...

But I honestly can't see work on both MN and Interconnector starting next year.

IIMII

BluntGuy wrote: »

I honestly can't see work on both MN and Interconnector starting next year.

I can't see work on anything really starting next year, at least not until the cycle of cut backs is completed. I think the governement may well be in a situation where it is not politically acceptable to ditch projects, but it may not be politically acceptable to start them either whilst in the middle of cutting expenditure elsewhere. I bet they'll find a comfortable fence, and avoid starting one without the other

Zoney

murphaph wrote: »

We're in a national emergency to all intents and purposes. **** Claregalway and divert every penny to Dublin NOW! Dublin has and will continue to be the beating heart of our economy for ever. It is what has made all these rural schemes possible-don't strangle it when it most needs our national collective help!

Yes, because that will help the regions keep jobs and not just be a complete burden on Dublin taxpayers. Plus all the mess of even *more* economic migration to Dublin, a city which already cannot be financed enough for the percentage of the population there, because we have to keep an entire country running, not just Dublin city.

A bypass of Claregalway indirectly benefits Dubliners due to the huge effect it will have in saving time and money in Galway and its hinterlands - thus helping that region to be more self-sufficient rather than being even more of a net tax burden.

All that focussing on Dublin in the current dire circumstances will acheive, is the loss of *even more* jobs in the regions, and an even greater chance of bankrupting the country. It's not like Dublin can cope with an influx of economic migrants from the regions in the current circumstances! Nor is much reduction in the costs of administering the regions achieved - quite the reverse with the loss of local income.

Murphaph - I do not think you are realising the precipitous circumstances of cities like Limerick, and how infeasible it is to allow complete economic collapse in such places so as they become a huge drain on the national coffers without hardly any contribution. At the moment, we are facing the prospect of decades of economic doldrums in the entire Midwest area unless a strategy is found to deal with thousands and thousands of jobs being lost due to Dell, suppliers and local services/retail and the €100 million plus taken out of the local economy. In case you aren't aware - even with Dell, the city (mainly due to the division between three local authorities) was barely providing enough economic focus for West Limerick, North Cork, West Clare, North Tipp/South Offaly. The new roads in the pipeline would have improved things a lot - unfortunately they are decades late!

How in these circumstances is it remotely feasible for the State to focus just on one area, however important it is?

murphaph

oney, if Dublin is left floundering (again) and denied the infrastructure a capital city needs, Ireland will sink completely.

London had an underground before any rural bypasses or motorway were built. Berlin had an underground before 1km of Autobahn was built. Dublin has been left behind by other european capitals for far too long. Budapest is CURRENTLY build metro line 4 and 5 is set to go next year. In Hungary they accept that their capital needs sorting first. We are competing with the hungarians etc.

Ireland is TOO SMALL to be diluting jobs all over the place. That's one of our main problems. In (for example) Bavaria (roughly the size of ireland), people expect that if they grow up in a regional or rural area that they will have to head off to Munich or Nurnberg to study and work and visit home at the weekends/holidays. They don't expect jobs to be brought to their rural area or small town.

Ireland needs to accept that there is an economy of scale issue here and it's high time we did focus on Dublin. If people have to move, they have to move. I know lots of guys in the states who lost jobs on the east coast in the 80's and had to pack their familes up and head 2000miles west.

paulm17781

Well put Murhaph. I am beginning to accept that I may have to move from Dublin to London / US / Australia for work. I have never understood why people expect jobs on their door. That's what cities are for. If Dublin can't sustain jobs, I don't see anywhere else being able to.

Zoney

murphaph wrote: »

Ireland is TOO SMALL to be diluting jobs all over the place. That's one of our main problems. In (for example) Bavaria (roughly the size of ireland), people expect that if they grow up in a regional or rural area that they will have to head off to Munich or Nurnberg to study and work and visit home at the weekends/holidays. They don't expect jobs to be brought to their rural area or small town.

Ireland needs to accept that there is an economy of scale issue here and it's high time we did focus on Dublin. If people have to move, they have to move. I know lots of guys in the states who lost jobs on the east coast in the 80's and had to pack their familes up and head 2000miles west.

Bavaria is the same area with *three times* the population! As such even with so much of the population concentrated on Munich and environs, the regions are still quite populated! We have not such luxury here.

Your comments about rural areas and small towns are disingenious - I am in favour of a proper spatial strategy - but that involves *developing* places like Galway and Limerick!

The reason Dublin is floundering is that already the jobs and population are too skewed, and we have a completely dysfunctional capital as well as impoverished regions. The two go hand in hand.

Your preferred strategy is *not* beneficial to Dublin - unless the Republic suddenly just included greater Dublin and ditched the rest. Even then such a country would suffer for having impoverished neighbours. Why do you think there was any interest in other European countries to have Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Greece etc. improve?

As for the States? It's no model of the way things should be done - do you really think it is sane to let situations like Detroit and the rust belt develop? For a "united" states they sure aren't very cohesive!

bg07

One thing that can be taken from the DoT press release is that the following projects are not even being paid lip service any more:-

• Metro West
• Navan to Dunboyne Railway
• WRC Phase 2 and 3
• Lucan Luas Line
• Rathfarnham luas line
• Luas extension to Bray
• Luas city centre link

These projects seem destined to be on ice for at least 5 years before the diggers move in.

Personally I'd willingly sacrifice the above projects and maybe even metro north for a few more years if they started construction of the interconnector as soon as possible.

paulm17781

bg07 wrote: »

One thing that can be taken from the DoT press release is that the following projects are not even being paid lip service any more:-

• Metro West
• Navan to Dunboyne Railway
• WRC Phase 2 and 3
• Lucan Luas Line
• Rathfarnham luas line
• Luas extension to Bray
• Luas city centre link

These projects seem destined to be on ice for at least 5 years before the diggers move in.

Personally I'd willingly sacrifice the above projects and maybe even metro north for a few more years if they started construction of the interconnector as soon as possible.

Couldn't agree more. IMO, these were superficial anyway.

murphaph

It's incredible that with effect from March this year anyone developing (that includes building a private dwelling on your own land) within 1km either side of the metro west corridor is paying significant development levies towards metro west, yet they may never see it built. It's grossly unfair and there should be a mechanism whereby if no construction starts within a set number of years of you having paid your levy that you get it returned to you.

KC61

bg07 wrote: »

One thing that can be taken from the DoT press release is that the following projects are not even being paid lip service any more:-

• Metro West
• Navan to Dunboyne Railway
• WRC Phase 2 and 3
• Lucan Luas Line
• Rathfarnham luas line
• Luas extension to Bray
• Luas city centre link

These projects seem destined to be on ice for at least 5 years before the diggers move in.

Personally I'd willingly sacrifice the above projects and maybe even metro north for a few more years if they started construction of the interconnector as soon as possible.

I would suggest that the Rathfarnham LUAS has been consigned to the dustbin of history for good, as the costs and benefits were both negative. It was a crazy idea from the start as the entire route was on street.

paulm17781

KC61 wrote: »

I would suggest that the Rathfarnham LUAS has been consigned to the dustbin of history for good, as the costs and benefits were both negative. It was a crazy idea from the start as the entire route was on street.

That was just a thought anyway wasn't it? IIRC, it was never in T21.

spacetweek

paulm17781 wrote: »

That was just a thought anyway wasn't it? IIRC, it was never in T21.

Yes, Line E was only mentioned in T21 as one that they would study. It failed to pass this test last year and won't be built now. Metro South will cover much of the territory it would serve anyway.

Murphaph, good point about the Metro West levies. There's no way we'll see MW until at least 2015 or maybe later now.

Mysterious, I actually agree with you (stop the lights!) about Claregalway. A bypass of it is more immediately needed than the M17. Though, with the M18 and M17 being one combined project, the motorway will probably go ahead now.

Not generally too impressed with the DoT's statement. Basically it says that the budget will allow them to continue building things that are under construction already and that they are contractually obliged to finish now. That went without saying. No real statement made on MN or IC, which are still described as the dreaded "In planning". Based on this article, IC sounds like starting in Q4 2010. With a decision on MN not due until Sep and its tenders not ready until Q1 2010, I predict Q2 2010 for MN to start, if at all, depending on how the tendering goes.

The only significant thing I noticed in there was the commitment to begin work this year on the DART resignalling, which is a very important behind-the-scenes project. This is good at least.

invincibleirish

Zoney wrote: »

Your comments about rural areas and small towns are disingenious - I am in favour of a proper spatial strategy - but that involves *developing* places like Galway and Limerick!

The reason Dublin is floundering is that already the jobs and population are too skewed, and we have a completely dysfunctional capital as well as impoverished regions. The two go hand in hand.

Your comments about a 'proper' spatial strategy are interesting, as we have seen with projects like the WRC & the M9, which have spurious benefits, but were justified on the grounds of promoting balanced spatial strategy. If we are serious about developing a spatial strategy that works, it would have to focus on only one or two key areas, and that includes Dublin, would you accept this if Limerick or Galway were not included? the NSS as is a failure but it kept everyone in th regions happy.

Zoney

invincibleirish wrote: »

Your comments about a 'proper' spatial strategy are interesting, as we have seen with projects like the WRC & the M9, which have spurious benefits, but were justified on the grounds of promoting balanced spatial strategy. If we are serious about developing a spatial strategy that works, it would have to focus on only one or two key areas, and that includes Dublin, would you accept this if Limerick or Galway were not included? the NSS as is a failure but it kept everyone in th regions happy.

The NSS as is wasn't attempted! There are valid arguments that it wasn't conservative enough in the no. of hubs, but we didn't even stick to that - the nonsensical decentralisation programme involved other disparate locations rather than focussing on the hubs/gateways. And yes, I would say the NSS had too many locations, but to suggest it shouldn't involve Limerick *and* Galway, the third and fourth cities in the Republic, is fanciful!

BluntGuy

bg07 wrote: »

One thing that can be taken from the DoT press release is that the following projects are not even being paid lip service any more:-

• Metro West
• Navan to Dunboyne Railway
• WRC Phase 2 and 3
• Lucan Luas Line
• Rathfarnham luas line
• Luas extension to Bray
• Luas city centre link

These projects seem destined to be on ice for at least 5 years before the diggers move in.

Personally I'd willingly sacrifice the above projects and maybe even metro north for a few more years if they started construction of the interconnector as soon as possible.

Those weren't going ahead anyway... so it comes as no surprise.

And yes, Interconnector must take priority over Metro North and indeed all other transport infrastructure projects in the country, but I fear that will not happen. The DoT and our media have been giving undue precedence to Metro North and as such I fear if it comes down to choosing between IC and MN, MN will go ahead because it's the more politically beneficial project to proceed with.

And even if no payments are due until 2015 - that's great. But we shouldn't assume (as I feel many people do) that we're going to magically come out of recession and back into prosperity come 2012. People don't realise the extent of the damage our property bubble has done. It will take us years, perhaps a decade or two to return to what we had going before this FF government recked it all.

BluntGuy

Here is the examiner report:

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/ididqlsncw/

Gruffalo

murphaph wrote: »

oney, if Dublin is left floundering (again) and denied the infrastructure a capital city needs, Ireland will sink completely.

London had an underground before any rural bypasses or motorway were built. Berlin had an underground before 1km of Autobahn was built. Dublin has been left behind by other european capitals for far too long. Budapest is CURRENTLY build metro line 4 and 5 is set to go next year. In Hungary they accept that their capital needs sorting first. We are competing with the hungarians etc.

Ireland is TOO SMALL to be diluting jobs all over the place. That's one of our main problems. In (for example) Bavaria (roughly the size of ireland), people expect that if they grow up in a regional or rural area that they will have to head off to Munich or Nurnberg to study and work and visit home at the weekends/holidays. They don't expect jobs to be brought to their rural area or small town.

Ireland needs to accept that there is an economy of scale issue here and it's high time we did focus on Dublin. If people have to move, they have to move. I know lots of guys in the states who lost jobs on the east coast in the 80's and had to pack their familes up and head 2000miles west.

The usual Dublin sh1te. How do you plan to get 4.25 million people living in Dublin, educate them, provide facilities for them, Hospitals for them etc. etc. Where are you going to put all this stuff if everything is put in the 3rd smallest county in the country. The country would fall apart, it would be unworkable. Your post is just BS of the highest order.

invincibleirish

Zoney wrote: »

The NSS as is wasn't attempted! There are valid arguments that it wasn't conservative enough in the no. of hubs, but we didn't even stick to that - the nonsensical decentralisation programme involved other disparate locations rather than focussing on the hubs/gateways. And yes, I would say the NSS had too many locations, but to suggest it shouldn't involve Limerick *and* Galway, the third and fourth cities in the Republic, is fanciful!

But this kind of argument underlined is the same kind of indignation thats evident when it comes to any kind of rationalisation in national plans with a view to concentrating resources in fewer areas. The NSS with its 17 Hubs/Gateways compromising 20+ towns was always doomed to failure. Who misses out?

murphaph

Gruffalo wrote: »

The usual Dublin sh1te. How do you plan to get 4.25 million people living in Dublin, educate them, provide facilities for them, Hospitals for them etc. etc. Where are you going to put all this stuff if everything is put in the 3rd smallest county in the country. The country would fall apart, it would be unworkable. Your post is just BS of the highest order.

As Zoney himself admitted, the NSS failed becuse many of you guys in the regions and yur politicians couldn't agree amongst yourselves that certain towns had to lose out under the NSS and so it was watered down and watered down so as to appear that no parish pump would lose it's infrastructure!

That's the problem-you all want your parish/village/town/county to have a hospital/university/industrial estate/etc. It's the GAA County Jersey mentality that has is fcuked as much as anything else.

You want one off houses all over the fcuking place and then expect jobs and services to be brought to you. Ridiculous.

bill_ashmount

murphaph wrote: »

Ireland is TOO SMALL to be diluting jobs all over the place. That's one of our main problems. In (for example) Bavaria (roughly the size of ireland), people expect that if they grow up in a regional or rural area that they will have to head off to Munich or Nurnberg to study and work and visit home at the weekends/holidays. They don't expect jobs to be brought to their rural area or small town.

Can you define regional? Should everything be focused on Dublin? Move 4.2 million people into Dublin county?

Cork stands on its own two feet economically providing a surplus to the Irish goverment and should be deveopled as well.

invincibleirish

bill_ashmount wrote: »

Cork stands on its own two feet economically providing a surplus to the Irish goverment and should be deveopled as well.

Is it not a case that its pretty evenly balanced? are you basing your claim on the CSO social transfer stats?

Gruffalo

murphaph wrote: »

As Zoney himself admitted, the NSS failed becuse many of you guys in the regions and yur politicians couldn't agree amongst yourselves that certain towns had to lose out under the NSS and so it was watered down and watered down so as to appear that no parish pump would lose it's infrastructure!

That's the problem-you all want your parish/village/town/county to have a hospital/university/industrial estate/etc. It's the GAA County Jersey mentality that has is fcuked as much as anything else.

You want one off houses all over the fcuking place and then expect jobs and services to be brought to you. Ridiculous.

And there is no difference between these people and you. You want everything in Dublin (which cannot cope with everything) while they want everything in the country.

I notice you did not answer my question. If we were to follow your braindead idea, where would we fit 4.25 million people and all the services and facilities they require?

And dont tell me what I think. I will tell you what I think, understand goson?

Metrobest

BluntGuy wrote: »

Those weren't going ahead anyway... so it comes as no surprise.

And yes, Interconnector must take priority over Metro North and indeed all other transport infrastructure projects in the country, but I fear that will not happen. The DoT and our media have been giving undue precedence to Metro North and as such I fear if it comes down to choosing between IC and MN, MN will go ahead because it's the more politically beneficial project to proceed with.

And even if no payments are due until 2015 - that's great. But we shouldn't assume (as I feel many people do) that we're going to magically come out of recession and back into prosperity come 2012. People don't realise the extent of the damage our property bubble has done. It will take us years, perhaps a decade or two to return to what we had going before this FF government recked it all.

Amidst all the gloom, it's hard to remember that Ireland has been running budget surpluses into the billions over the last ten years. Remember the good old days when an extra billion would roll in from this tax or another?

I think Ireland should max out the debt over the coming years and pump money into infrastucture projects like metro north and the underground DART. Not only do these projects generate tens of thousands of jobs directly and indirectly, they prepare Ireland to take advantage of the upswing which many people think will happen as early as this December. And now's the time to take advantage of lower constuction and wage costs.

If I had to single out one project essential for Ireland's economic future, it's got to be Metro North. Anyone who thinks it's the interconnector is living in cloud cookoo land - the interconnector predominantly services car dependent low density celtic tiger commuter housing on the outer suburbs of Dublin and Co Kildare. It's catering to dormitory commuter towns where you'll have a peak in the AM and PM Monday-Friday with trains empty in between. It will do zilch to take Ireland out of recession. It will obviously simplify commuter rail for Dublin. But the question is how much capacity this low density corridor really requires and whether or not there is any sustainable planning strategy.

Build the interconnector and no Metro North and you'll have people in two story semi Ds in Hazelhatch and Lucan speeding into Pearse Station in 20 minutes (if they still have jobs to go to) while executives flying into Dublin Airport endure third world traffic conditions, and the commuters of Swords sit on buses that take over one hour. Hardly the image of an economy that's likely to grow.

Metro North is a national stimulus to sustainable construction development along its short corridor, totally changing the lives of the citizens of North Dublin and contributing to the future success of the 2bn airport terminal DAA is building. Metro North is an engine for sustainable growth in Dublin. The interconnector is an economic black hole that's trying to alleviate the gross planning mistakes of times past, without any proper spatial strategy to justify why we need it, and where the passengers will actually come from to use it.

I can't believe anyone on this forum seriously thinks the interconnector is more important that Metro North!

It shoudn't be either/or. But if it is.. we have to be realistic about which project is going to benefit the exchequer and stimulate growth, and which one will drain resources for questionable benefits.

murphaph

Gruffalo wrote: »

And there is no difference between these people and you. You want everything in Dublin (which cannot cope with everything) while they want everything in the country.

I notice you did not answer my question. If we were to follow your braindead idea, where would we fit 4.25 million people and all the services and facilities they require?

And dont tell me what I think. I will tell you what I think, understand goson?

Angry much? lol.

I never suggested that EVERYONE move to Dublin. Go back and find where I did and I'll give you a gold star. That's why I didn't answer your silly question.

Gruffalo

Metrobest wrote: »

Amidst all the gloom, it's hard to remember that Ireland has been running budget surpluses into the billions over the last ten years. Remember the good old days when an extra billion would roll in from this tax or another?

I think Ireland should max out the debt over the coming years and pump money into infrastucture projects like metro north and the underground DART. Not only do these projects generate tens of thousands of jobs directly and indirectly, they prepare Ireland to take advantage of the upswing which many people think will happen as early as this December. And now's the time to take advantage of lower constuction and wage costs.

If I had to single out one project essential for Ireland's economic future, it's got to be Metro North. Anyone who thinks it's the interconnector is living in cloud cookoo land - the interconnector predominantly services car dependent low density celtic tiger commuter housing on the outer suburbs of Dublin and Co Kildare. It's catering to dormitory commuter towns where you'll have a peak in the AM and PM Monday-Friday with trains empty in between. It will do zilch to take Ireland out of recession. But it will obviously simplify commuter rail for Dublin. But the question is how much capacity this low density corridor really requires and whether or not there is any sustainable planning strategy.

Build the interconnector and no Metro North and you'll have people in two story semi Ds in Hazelhatch and Lucan speeding into Pearse Station in 20 minutes (if they still have jobs to go to) while executives flying into Dublin Airport endure third world traffic conditions, and the commuters of Swords sit on buses that take over one hour. Hardly the image of an economy that's likely to grow.

Metro North is a national stimulus to sustainable construction development along its short corridor, totally changing the lives of the citizens of North Dublin and contributing to the future success of the 2bn airport terminal DAA is building. Metro North is an engine for sustainable growth in Dublin. The interconnector is an economic black hole that's trying to alleviate the gross planning mistakes of times past, without any proper spatial strategy to justify why we need it, and where the passengers will actually come from to use it.

I can't believe anyone on this forum seriously thinks the interconnector is more important that Metro North!

Who are these mythical creatures that think we will be in the upswing by December?

You are also assuming that we will get back to making the money we did from the housing boom. Not a hope.

Gruffalo

murphaph wrote: »

Ireland needs to accept that there is an economy of scale issue here and it's high time we did focus on Dublin. If people have to move, they have to move.

Of course you did not say it:rolleyes: Get a career with FF you liar.

Amtmann

murphaph wrote: »

It's the GAA County Jersey mentality that has is fcuked as much as anything else

This is actually very true. More than anything else in this country, the GAA has perpetuated the parochial, rural, parish-pump mentality. I honestly believe we'd have been better off as a nation if it had never been founded.

*Furet backs slowly out of the thread*

murphaph

Gruffalo wrote: »

Of course you did not say it:rolleyes: Get a career with FF you liar.

Do you know what the word 'IF' means? I won't call you stupid like you called me a liar though.

Gruffalo

murphaph wrote: »

Do you know what the word 'IF' means? I won't call you stupid like you called me a liar though.

What do you think would happen if the country just focused on Dublin? Work it out and stop peddling your braindead ideas. Are you still trying to convince people that Dublin and Munich are the same size?

Gruffalo

Furet wrote: »

This is actually very true. More than anything else in this country, the GAA has perpetuated the parochial, rural, parish-pump mentality. I honestly believe we'd have been better off as a nation if it had never been founded.

*Furet backs slowly out of the thread*

I think you will find that the Church has more to do with Parishs than the GAA. Also take a look at any other country and you will see that people want things in their area, yet they dont have the GAA.

Gruffalo

Since the likes of Murph are always trying to peddle their lies about the counties outside Dublin, I thought I would link to something that they have done for themselves. Cork people have managed to organise to buy a ship and hope to reinstate the Cork - Swansea route this summer.

http://www.bringbacktheswanseacorkferry.com/

Sponge Bob

I find these Dub vs Country arguments are tiresome and circular

The cost of finishing the Cork - Tuam motorway and the benefits of same are roughly proportional to the Interconnector project . There is no yawning gap between them .

Silly outlier projects are being punted in all the regions, eg Luas to Rathfarnham vs WRC Cooloney - Claremorris vs the Gluas .

Why should the dubs have a monopoly on these outlier project eh ??

Metrobest

Gruffalo wrote: »

Who are these mythical creatures that think we will be in the upswing by December?

You are also assuming that we will get back to making the money we did from the housing boom. Not a hope.

Read The Economist...

The idea is the Irish boom happened in 2 phases; the first was due to genuine labour reforms, an influx of foreign capital, and an entrepreneurial structure.

The second phase was fuelled by boom-bust construction activity, most of it seen in the commuter housing in the greater Dublin area, and an influx of cheap labour from Eastern Europe. Shielded by property tax, the government squandered resources on unsustainable social welfare programs, a bloated public sector/social partnership arrangement, and recklessly cut income taxes.

The economy has see-sawed from 'miracle' to 'basket case' in less than 12 months, but internationally, most people still assume Ireland is doing well, depsite all the frenzy of gloom that the media is creating.

Globally, with all the stimulus money being pumped in, the idea is that it will stimulate a recovery. The key for Ireland is to go back to Celtic Tiger phase 1 - a competive and flexibile economy with a sustainable tax base.

That's why the interconnector is a 'phase 2' legacy project that will do nothing for Ireland's internatioanl competitiveness, and put petrol on the fire of cheap low density housing construction that caused most of the mess Ireland is in.

Gruffalo

Metrobest wrote: »

Read The Economist...

The idea is the Irish boom happened in 2 phases; the first was due to genuine labour reforms, an influx of foreign capital, and an entrepreneurial structure.

The second phase was fuelled by boom-bust construction activity, most of it seen in the commuter housing in the greater Dublin area, and an influx of cheap labour from Eastern Europe. Shielded by property tax, the government squandered resources on unsustainable social welfare programs, a bloated public sector/social partnership arrangement, and recklessly cut income taxes.

The economy has see-sawed from 'miracle' to 'basket case' in less than 12 months, but internationally, most people still assume Ireland is doing well, depsite all the frenzy of gloom that the media is creating.

Globally, with all the stimulus money being pumped in, the idea is that it will stimulate a recovery. The key for Ireland is to go back to Celtic Tiger phase 1 - a competive and flexibile economy with a sustainable tax base.

That's why the interconnector is a 'phase 2' legacy project that will do nothing for Ireland's internatioanl competitiveness, and put petrol on the fire of cheap low density housing construction that caused most of the mess Ireland is in.

I will respectfully disagree with you on just about everything.

Zoney

murphaph wrote: »

That's the problem-you all want your parish/village/town/county to have a hospital/university/industrial estate/etc. It's the GAA County Jersey mentality that has is fcuked as much as anything else.

You want one off houses all over the fcuking place and then expect jobs and services to be brought to you. Ridiculous.

Are you or anyone else in Dublin somehow immune to this syndrome? Are not the same forces responsible for the mess in Dublin?

I find your generalisations about "the regions" quite insulting.

Metrobest

Gruffalo wrote: »

I will respectfully disagree with you on just about everything.

I will respectfully suggest that your failure to put forward any valid argument indicates that deep down you know I'm right. Thanks.

Amtmann

Gruffalo wrote: »

I think you will find that the Church has more to do with Parishs than the GAA.

Not so sure about that. The local club forms a bond, a reinforced form of parochial camaraderie if you will, which emphasises an 'us versus them' mentality. Many people from villages and the surrounding countryside seem to want to build one-off houses in their parish in part because of the parochial sense of community that the local club engenders. I'm not sure that any other European country has a cultural phenomenon akin to our GAA, though I'm happy to be corrected on this.

Of course, there are other historical factors at play too: the lack of an industrial revolution in the 1800s for one, has encouraged dispersed, pre-industrial rural settlement patterns to endure to the present day. The lack of an industrial awakening in the nineteenth century meant that when republicanism took root here in the early twentieth century it did so in a rural context ('rural republicanism') which was - and remains - predominantly conservative and inward looking. This of course happened in tandem with the expulsion of the landlord class, and the disintegration of their holdings into much smaller privately-owned farms, which are the source today of all the bothersome one-off houses, which cut away the population density from our cities that would have enabled us to have three or four large population centres, good services, and a proper countryside used for agriculture and recreation. But no. By the way, if we'd had an industrial revolution the church would probably have lost most of its influence a lot earlier than it did. We'd probably also have a far more polarised political system too, and a far stronger left wing. And, to relate this more directly to the thread, we'd almost certainly already have a few metros and interconnectors in place.

Gruffalo

Metrobest wrote: »

I will respectfully suggest that your failure to put forward any valid argument indicates that deep down you know I'm right. Thanks.

All the political parties, the ECB, most recognised economists know that we will not be in an upswing by December, though I hope you are right.

Your suggestion that the world does not know that we are in the sh1t is laughable at best.

Gruffalo

Furet wrote: »

Not so sure about that. The local club forms a bond, a reinforced form of parochial camaraderie if you will, which emphasises an 'us versus them' mentality. Many people from villages and the surrounding countryside seem to want to build one-off houses in their parish in part because of the parochial sense of community that the local club engenders. I'm not sure that any other European country has a cultural phenomenon akin to our GAA, though I'm happy to be corrected on this.

Of course, there are other historical factors at play too: the lack of an industrial revolution in the 1800s for one, has encouraged dispersed, pre-industrial rural settlement patterns to endure to the present day. The lack of an industrial awakening in the nineteenth century meant that when republicanism took root here in the early twentieth century it did so in a rural context ('rural republicanism') which was - and remains - predominantly conservative and inward looking. This of course happened in tandem with the expulsion of the landlord class, and the disintegration of their holdings into much smaller privately-owned farms, which are the source today of all the bothersome one-off houses, which cut away the population density from our cities that would have enabled us to have three or four large population centres, good services, and a proper countryside used for agriculture and recreation. But no. By the way, if we'd had an industrial revolution the church would probably have lost most of its influence a lot earlier than it did. We'd probably also have a far more polarised political system too, and a far stronger left wing. And, to relate this more directly to the thread, we'd almost certainly already have a few metros and interconnectors in place.

I agree a lot more with your second paragraph than your first. I also think that country people build one off houses because they can. Loose planning laws have played a major part.