CIE v Wexford Bus on Pat Kenny

Southsider1

Bus Eireann were on Pat Kenny's show this morning crying about Wexford Bus getting a temporary licence to operate services from Rosslare port. Wexford bus aquitted themselves very well. BE sounded like spoilt kids.

JHMEG

Southsider1 wrote: »

Wexford bus aquitted themselves very well. BE sounded like spoilt kids.

Would agree with that.

Talk of people getting stranded at the port yesterday and not one mention of the train service.

Cookie_Monster

Why were Wexford bus given the licence over the national operator though? Why were BE not simply told to provide an upgraded service for the duration and thats the end of it?

Southsider1

Why not? BE don't have enough coaches. They admitted that in the interview. They would have to hire in from private operators. He was VERY cagey on the aspect of Govt/EU funding unfair competition tho.

Cookie_Monster

Southsider1 wrote: »

Why not? BE don't have enough coaches. They admitted that in the interview. They would have to hire in from private operators. 0He was VERY cagey on the aspect of Govt/EU funding unfair competition tho.

If thats valid fair enough I suppose.

Southsider1 wrote: »

0He was VERY cagey on the aspect of Govt/EU funding unfair competition tho.

Who, the BE guy? Of course they face unfair competition from the private sector who can cherry pick their routes and don't have to provide PSO duties or run unprofitable service to suit local interests and receive all sorts of tax breaks and incentives to do it.

Philistine

I thought that BE's main argument was that Wexford Bus were initially operating without a licence?

Cookie_Monster

Philistine wrote: »

I thought that BE's main argument was that Wexford Bus were initially operating without a licence?

And sure why not, there's been lots of proof recently that you needn't bother getting a licence any more and have no fear of any consequences

Philistine

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

And sure why not, there's been lots of proof recently that you needn't bother getting a licence any more and have no fear of any consequences

Lack of consequences for not having a licence shouldn't mean BE don't have a legitimate complaint.

Cookie_Monster

Philistine wrote: »

Lack of consequences for not having a licence shouldn't mean BE don't have a legitimate complaint.

I completely agree but its been proven by at least 2 companies that they can do what they want without worry of consequences already, Wexford bus would presumably rely on this fact were it to go any further.

MysticalSoul

Having used Wexford Bus, I much prefer their buses - more leg room

dowlingm

Imagine how much they would cry if the School Bus contract was broken up into regional tenders, the current national one for a large part involving BE having money "rest in their account" before being paid out to contract hire.

JHMEG

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Why were Wexford bus given the licence over the national operator though?

The national operator!??:eek: The state-owned taxpayer-subsidised (former) bus monopoly you mean?

Shouldn't the contract go to those who will provide the best service to customers?

KC61

I think the issue is that BE play by the rules and do not operate services without a licence. Wexford Bus may initially have been operating an unlicensed service.

It's the same issue as Citylink operating their non-stop service without a licence, while Gobus are licensed to do it.

I would say all BE are looking for is a level playing pitch which is fair enough.

antoinolachtnai

Bus Eireann do not need a licence to operate a new route.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Bus Eireann do not need a licence to operate a new route.

You know exactly what I meant.

You are getting into minutiae here. The point is that they cannot just start a service at will. They need Departmental permission beforehand.

Cookie_Monster

JHMEG wrote: »

The national operator!??:eek:

yes

JHMEG wrote: »

The state-owned taxpayer-subsidised (former) bus monopoly you mean?

the very same

JHMEG

KC61 wrote: »

The point is that they cannot just start a service at will. They need Departmental permission beforehand.

Is that correct? That they don't need a licence or approval, they just need to give notice of their intentions?

timmywex

To be fiar, wexford bus are giving huge competition and its needed. I get the wexford bus every week, much faster, wifi, cheaper, much better customer service (if you want to get off the bus anywhere, just let the driver know, no problem, with BE its just the stops, strictly just stops!) etc etc

Bus eireann totally saturated the route as the wexford bus spokeperson said, playing dirty....

To be fair a bus company protecting local jobs, offering free transfers down to rosslare europort, no harm done.

I think bus eireann thought they had all the rosslare passangers, just generally being spoilt imo..

Bus eireann man wasnt expecting such a hard interview anyways!

KC61

JHMEG wrote: »

Is that correct? That they don't need a licence or approval, they just need to give notice of their intentions?

I think that you have misread what I said.

Neither Dublin Bus nor Bus Eireann hold licences for their services as they are outside that process.

HOWEVER, they have to get departmental approval for any service change, timetable change or new route before they can commence. Whilst they do not have licences they must notify the DoT / NTA of their plans and then must wait for the Department to approve them before commencing operations.

JHMEG

KC61 wrote: »

I think that you have misread what I said.

No, I read it correctly, it's just not very clear

KC61 wrote: »

Neither Dublin Bus nor Bus Eireann hold licences for their services as they are outside that process.

Ok, so they don't need a licence to operate a route.

KC61 wrote: »

HOWEVER, they have to get departmental approval for any service change, timetable change or new route before they can commence. Whilst they do not have licences they must notify the DoT / NTA of their plans and then must wait for the Department to approve them before commencing operations.

Does the department ever/often disapprove/reject a route?

Does it take as long to process notification from BE/DB as it does to process applications from the private sector?

centrewest

"Neither Dublin Bus nor Bus Eireann hold licences for their services as they are outside that process"

thats just for the pso srvices, for their commercial routes BE come under the same licence process as everyone else, thats what the spokesman meant by a level playing field.

Cookie_Monster

timmywex wrote: »

(if you want to get off the bus anywhere, just let the driver know, no problem, with BE its just the stops, strictly just stops!)

thats dangerous and probably violate the terms of their insurance.

JHMEG wrote: »

Does the department ever/often disapprove/reject a route?

there were a few issue surrounding port tunnel routes and I imagine its the same reason a lot of the routes can't be streamlined. DB's 7 down the new(ish) Sallyglen road rather than thru Sallynoggin for instance

JHMEG wrote: »

Does it take as long to process notification from BE/DB as it does to process applications from the private sector?

Dealing with the PS, takes as long as they like...

JHMEG

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Dealing with the PS, takes as long as they like...

That's actually the CS, but curious do DB get preferential treatment -or- if the process is different for them is it by chance any quicker?

KC61

This has been an ongoing issue. Dublin Bus or Bus Eireann do not get any from what I can see any preferential treatment.

They have had various proposed services either refused or had to go through elongated processes to get changes through.

The 141 which was to operate from Swords via the Old Swords Road (not serving the Airport) and Drumcondra (note not via the Port Tunnel) through the city centre to Rathmines was either never decided upon or refused by the licensing department because of the perceived threat to Swords Express - note neither service had launched at the time!

The 37 cannot operate to Blanchardstown Shopping Centre because it shares appx 1 mile of road with UrBus from Ashtown Park Gate to Laurel Lodge, despite the fact that after that it goes on a long diversion around Carpenterstown. Thus residents in Carpenterstown are deprived a improved link to/from the shopping centre.

There was a protracted period of wrangling over whether the 41X could operate via the Port Tunnel resulting in a local TD, Department officials and Dublin Bus managers having to tour around Swords to find an appropriate route that would not conflict with Swords Express. This despite repeated calls from residents to get the service in place.

Certain Bus Eireann services on particular routes have specific restrictions on where they can pick up/set down, but often at times where there are no competing services operating. It appears to be very random.

Bus Eireann applied for a non-stop service between Dublin and Galway four or five years ago and are still awaiting a response!

I am aware that while Circle Line was operational Dublin Bus were precluded from operating any additional services on the Lucan QBC - even to places that Circle Line did not operate to, such as Leixlip or Maynooth! Nor could Dublin Bus use the larger tri-axle buses on that corridor - this despite the fact that people were being left behind at bus stops!

The whole process is nuts. You have Swords Express waiting I think over two years to get started. They're waiting 18 months to get potential changes to routes in Swords.

There usually is no issue where there is no competing services along any part of a route that any company (be it DB, BE, or a private company) wants to change. In those cirmcumstances the changes usually happen quickly. However if there are competing services then there is unlikely to be any change happening fast irrespective if the changes are beneficial to the customer. It can take months or indeed years to find a compromise.

antoinolachtnai

First, BE does not need a statutory licence for any route, commercial or otherwise.

Secondly, BE and DB in principle need administrative notification, not statutory permission to operate a route. There is no penalty whatsoever and they are not subject to the law if they do not obey this administrative rule. However, it seems to be the practice that this is often applied for retrospectively and sometimes it is not applied for at all. For sure there are private operators operating without licences, but that is not really the point.

Thirdly, BE and DB have a 'service level' for dealing with their administrative notifications, which means they will get a yes, no, or maybe on any application within four weeks. Private operators who have licences do not get this benefit and will often not hear anything for years after an application is lodged.

The rules are clear that BE and DB notifications should be dealt with behind prior applications from private operators. However, this rule is ignored to DB's advantage in my experience.

KC61

I think Antoinolachtnai the real point is that the whole system is a mess and the person who is the real loser tends to be the customer.

But I will say that I'm certainly not aware of DB implementing changes without having got departmental approval first. Perhaps you could give us some concrete examples? DB has certainly been instructed by the department not to operate certain services.

antoinolachtnai

Customers?!

One example would be the 41x service as operated between November 2007 and June 2008. Another would be certain stops on the 41x service as operated between June 2008 and June 2009. In relation to Bus Eireann, I understand that company operated without a notification in the vicinity of Cork Airport for periods from 2006-2008. I have quite a big file of complaints here to the Department of Transport by various operators that were sustained by the Department of Transport and it is by no means complete.

centrewest

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

First, BE does not need a statutory licence for any route, commercial or otherwise.

Secondly, BE and DB in principle need administrative notification, not statutory permission to operate a route. There is no penalty whatsoever and they are not subject to the law if they do not obey this administrative rule. However, it seems to be the practice that this is often applied for retrospectively and sometimes it is not applied for at all. For sure there are private operators operating without licences, but that is not really the point.

Thirdly, BE and DB have a 'service level' for dealing with their administrative notifications, which means they will get a yes, no, or maybe on any application within four weeks. Private operators who have licences do not get this benefit and will often not hear anything for years after an application is lodged.

The rules are clear that BE and DB notifications should be dealt with behind prior applications from private operators. However, this rule is ignored to DB's advantage in my experience.

you're wrong there, all commercial operators need a route licence, you're making the same mistake in the wexford bus argument yesterday, ye're confusing ndp / t21 with commercial operations, the 2 are quite different, this is from the be website "Cork Airport – More than 80 daily services including a frequent direct coach service between Cork Airport and Cork city centre (Parnell Place), which can be used to connect to the integrated network to travel to the rest of Cork and country" an unofficial route

antoinolachtnai

Can you produce a licence number for a DB or BE service? The relevant legislation is section 25 of the 1958 Transport Act, which is unambiguous.

NDP and Transport 21 are capital programs and have nothing to do with the funding of transport operations.

JHMEG

Section 24 is equally unambiguous

24.— Section 7 of the Road Transport Act, 1932, which prohibits the carrying on of a passenger road service without a passenger licence, shall not apply to the Board.

The Board = CIE

That would appear to put CIE at an advantage.

KC61

JHMEG wrote: »

Section 24 is equally unambiguous



The Board = CIE

That would appear to put CIE at an advantage.

In practice however, since the early 2000s the DoT have insisted that no change be put through without their say so and by and large that's what happens.

The 37 being a case in point.

There may be odd instances where this didn't happen, but I can think of a couple of situations where when it did CIE were instructed by DOT to go back to the old service.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Customers?!

Yes those of us who use public transport who have been (from time to time) discommoded by the DoT and this archaic legislation.

Be they your customers, be they CIE customers, be they any other operators' customers.

JHMEG

The fact remains that not requiring a licence does put CIE at an advantage. Some would argue that advantage is quite significant, some wouldn't.

However, there is an irony that an outfit that doesn't require a licence is complaining about an outfit that doesn't have one. I think we'd all agree on that.

Cookie_Monster

JHMEG wrote: »

The fact remains that not requiring a licence does put CIE at an advantage. Some would argue that advantage is quite significant, some wouldn't.

So, where's the problem with this. CIE has a big enough disadvantage with private operators only moving in on its profitable routes and depriving it of massive revenue, in turn costing the user and taxpayer more in subsidisation. DB and BE should be given every possible advantage over private operators.

Southsider1

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

So, where's the problem with this. CIE has a big enough disadvantage with private operators only moving in on its profitable routes and depriving it of massive revenue, in turn costing the user and taxpayer more in subsidisation. DB and BE should be given every possible advantage over private operators.

Cookie Monster, You sound like Barry Kenny! Can't you see that CIE/BE/DB are already at a huge advantage over the private sector. They collect (and waste) massive subsidies from the Government. All 'non profitable' routes are subsidised and even some profitable ones are too. They are wasting vast sums of money. For example they run a bus every hour between Dublin and Rosslare both ways. So between, say, midnight and 6am they're running empty. 12 services. Good economics Cookie Monster?

Cookie_Monster

Southsider1 wrote: »

They collect (and waste) massive subsidies from the Government. All 'non profitable' routes are subsidised and even some profitable ones are too. They are wasting vast sums of money. For example they run a bus every hour between Dublin and Rosslare both ways.

I've never said CIE is perfect and, yes, they waste a lot of money but I also believe private "competition" in regards to public transport does not work and should not be allowed. Public transport should be state-run or at least one private operator run under state guidelines (like the Luas for example). Multiple companies on the the same similar routes is just a waste of money and resources which invariably the taxpayer has to cover.

Just look at the mess PT is in the UK with all the private operators...

JHMEG

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Public transport should be state-run

Just like in air travel the market has been improved no end since the private sector were allowed to compete.

The logical conclusion is ending state involvement in providing transport, and paying contractors to provide loss-making public services.

The government can barely govern, so why allow it to run public transport.

KC61

Southsider1 wrote: »

Cookie Monster, You sound like Barry Kenny! Can't you see that CIE/BE/DB are already at a huge advantage over the private sector. They collect (and waste) massive subsidies from the Government. All 'non profitable' routes are subsidised and even some profitable ones are too. They are wasting vast sums of money. For example they run a bus every hour between Dublin and Rosslare both ways. So between, say, midnight and 6am they're running empty. 12 services. Good economics Cookie Monster?

Bus Eireann were viewed by the Deloitte report as being in line with best practice.

The night-time services on route 2 all service the airport and as such are hardly a waste of time.

timmywex

But since virtually no one travels on them they are! I mean the only passangers are generally a few drunks going from wexford to rosslare on a saturday night...

Every hour only really happened as a result of wexford bus starting, thereby BE saturating the route...

Cookie_Monster

but its not every hour according to the timetable.

Every two hours overnight.

JHMEG

timmywex wrote: »

Every hour only really happened as a result of wexford bus starting, thereby BE saturating the route...

Wexford Bus person said BE didn't run any buses at all, until Wexford Bus started a year later, and then BE put on 20 buses a day.

Cookie_Monster

JHMEG wrote: »

Wexford Bus person said BE didn't run any buses at all, until Wexford Bus started a year later, and then BE put on 20 buses a day.

well clearly thats wrong, the 002 has been around for years, if not decades

antoinolachtnai

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

So, where's the problem with this. CIE has a big enough disadvantage with private operators only moving in on its profitable routes and depriving it of massive revenue, in turn costing the user and taxpayer more in subsidisation. DB and BE should be given every possible advantage over private operators.

No, this is just not true. DB and BE are commercial operators. They operate these services under a public service contract. They are paid what is considered a commercial rate for running non-viable services, under a contract. They do not make a loss on any PSO route.

Cookie_Monster

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

No, this is just not true. DB and BE are commercial operators. They operate these services under a public service contract. They are paid what is considered a commercial rate for running non-viable services, under a contract. They do not make a loss on any PSO route.

semantics, they (CIE) make a €300m loss per year which is made up by the gov so they can run unprofitable but community orientated service along side other viable routes. If you allow private operators onto their profitable route then the funding required from the gov increases as revenue decreases. Either that or as was the case in November there are massive service cutbacks as the gov will not fund as much.

Southsider1

Fair dues Cookie Monster. you fight the BE cause very well!

timmywex

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

well clearly thats wrong, the 002 has been around for years, if not decades

The service has been around for years, but not at such frequency, and ti never went to the airport, always stopped at busaras. Only after wexford bus started did it go to the airport (and frequently passangers have to switch bus aswell)

And apologies on the timetable, it certainly used to be every hour overnight last time id checked!

antoinolachtnai

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

semantics, they (CIE) make a €300m loss per year which is made up by the gov so they can run unprofitable but community orientated service along side other viable routes. If you allow private operators onto their profitable route then the funding required from the gov increases as revenue decreases. Either that or as was the case in November there are massive service cutbacks as the gov will not fund as much.

If it's just semantics, then why did the chief executives of DB and BE sign service contracts on behalf of the companies?

The subsidy per passenger on DB and BE is now higher than ever. Unfortunately this is because passenger numbers are falling and are down at 2000 levels, despite major investment.

Cookie_Monster

Southsider1 wrote: »

Fair dues Cookie Monster. you fight the BE cause very well!

I'm not trying to defend BE (or CIE) per se, rather the idea of a (proper) state run transport agency.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

If it's just semantics, then why did the chief executives of DB and BE sign service contracts on behalf of the companies?

Because if they didn't the government would have told them to anyway once local TDs got involved.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The subsidy per passenger on DB and BE is now higher than ever. Unfortunately this is because passenger numbers are falling and are down at 2000 levels, despite major investment.

3 reasons I see for this;

1. Fallind demand as mentioned, yet many service must still be run as PSO routes (and rightly so)

2. Comptition eroding revenue.

3. Which is the main one. The shambolic nature of CIE and its refusal to integrate and modernise, its outdated workpractices, it vested interets from management with their jobs for the boys, the unions with their refusal to make even the smallest changes without a fuss, the government with every local TD unduely influencing projects and routes.

I don't support CIE but rather the idea of a state run transport system.

The best thing that could happen to public transport in this country is the gov simply outsourcing management of CIE to the like of Deutche Bann of SBB management and let them get on and make all the nessicary changes, remove the unions and have a PT service based on customer and community needs.

Unfortunitly this will never happen.

JHMEG

I've no doubt that without private operators in the market that CIE would still require the same levels of subvention.

Carawaystick

The fact the act from 1932 was quoted says so much about the poor public transport here.....
I mean what could have changed in 78 years regarding this?


Also the 33X and 33D were changed, when IÉ let their bridge fall into the sea through their own admitted incompetence, in a few days, so either the dot actually could get their fingers out and sort out a route change if they felt like it or DB changed the bus routes without their permission.

AlekSmart

To be fiar, wexford bus are giving huge competition and its needed. I get the wexford bus every week, much faster, wifi, cheaper, much better customer service (if you want to get off the bus anywhere, just let the driver know, no problem, with BE its just the stops, strictly just stops!) etc etc

Bus eireann totally saturated the route as the wexford bus spokeperson said, playing dirty....

To be fair a bus company protecting local jobs, offering free transfers down to rosslare europort, no harm done.

I suppose this could be described as the Sean Quinn principle,whereby no harm is deemed to be done once there are a few oul "local" jobs created/preserved.

Additionally the "get off the bus anywhere" stunt only serves to underline a far more serious problem for the likes of Wexford Bus and that is where do they draw the line in observing the regulations.

There are long standing and understandable reasons for having Bus Stops,most of which revolve around practicality and Safety.
It is my understanding that a requirement of a route licence is to furnish the Gardai with a list of proposed Stops for their approval.

Subsequent to that approval,an operator may then apply for Local Authority approval to erect a Pole or Shelter.

However,if the Gardai decide there is a safety issue with a particular location then permission will be refused.

Wexford Bus`s "drop em off anywhere" policy will only last until it`s first accident in or around a Stopping point.
Once an injured party`s barrister gets wind of a stopping point having no official approval then I guarantee Wexford Bus`s management will be fairly rapid in "regularising" their stopping arrangements.

However,as it stands our countrys Public Transport Regulatory procedures are largely irrelevant until the Patton Flyer case reaches it`s conclusion.

It`s also worth noting that it`s First Aircoach which is experiencing some of the worst aspects of the cavalier operator as not only are the Taxi Drivers scalping their business but now Wexford Bus is also muscling in on the Aircoach stops...ah well,sure a lad hasta make a shillin.....:)