Dublin Bus proposed to be either partly or fully privatised

dublinman1990

I just heard that yet again, Dublin Bus is being proposed by the Goverment to be either partly or fully privatised.

This option is forming part of the Public Service Reform in which is part of the times that we live in.

However, the Sunday Independent had reported that the company is being currently being as an option in a report from the Central Expenditure and Evaluation Unit (CEEU) Paper No 6 entitled Legacy Issues and Agency Rationalisation.

The actual paper is here below if you want to take a look

http://per.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/Paper-on-Legacy-Issues-and-Agency-Rationalisation.pdf

It is based on the same content with that of the 'An Bord Snip Nua' Report by UCD Economist Colm McCarthy.

A poll will be used to express your opinion, Thanks.

etchyed

dublinman1990 wrote: »

I just heard that yet again, Dublin Bus is being proposed by the Goverment to be either partly or fully privatised.

This option is forming part of the Public Service Reform in which is part of the times that we live in.

However, the Sunday Independent had reported that the company is being currently being as an option in a report from the Central Expenditure and Evaluation Unit (CEEU) Paper No 6 entitled Legacy Issues and Agency Rationalisation.

The actual paper is here below if you want to take a look

http://per.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/Paper-on-Legacy-Issues-and-Agency-Rationalisation.pdf

It is based on the same content with that of the 'An Bord Snip Nua' Report by UCD Economist Colm McCarthy.

A poll will be used to express your opinion, Thanks.

Sorry dublinman, but your post doesn't really make much sense. Where have you heard this? What do you mean that it's being "proposed by the Government"? Has it been raised by a minister or just suggested in the report you posted? What does "the company is being currently being as an option" mean?

The relevant section of the report is below:

8.3 Scheme: Dublin Bus Market
Proposal: Greater competition. Many of the Dublin Bus routes are perceived to be loss-making, making the Dublin Bus market an unattractive proposition for private operators. The Review Group on State Assets and Liabilities suggested a model whereby the formerly public company is privatised into a number of competing units and the regulator designs the network and tenders for the operation of the actual routes, which are open to all (private and former public sector providers). The companies tender for franchises and the package of routes is awarded to the company requiring the lowest subsidy. The Group recommended that the privatisation of all or part of Dublin Bus should be considered in due course, but only after government has decided on a model for competition in the Dublin bus market.

That sounds like the model used for London Buses. Happy days.

monument

A poll isn't really the best thing for a something that really isn't black or white -- privatisation could mean a lot of things.

I think it should only be looked at in conjunction with heavily segregated and prioritised BRT infrastructure routes on the main arterial routes and around the city centre. And these would require higher level of service than the current QBCs.

Tarabuses

monument wrote: »

A poll isn't really the best thing for a something that really isn't black or white -- privatisation could mean a lot of things.

I think it should only be looked at in conjunction with heavily segregated and prioritised BRT infrastructure routes on the main arterial routes and around the city centre. And these would require higher level of service than the current QBCs.

I would agree - there are different forms of privatisation within both the fully and partially catagories.

n97 mini

I think the Poll as it stands would have been better with just "change" or "no change" options, as we don't have full facts.

Although I don't know any reason to only partly privatise, unless as with the ESB, it's to appease the unions.

munchkin_utd

I do love the dublin bus bashing threads - especially when they are way off the mark!

The subsidies for Dublin bus are 3.6% of operating costs.
Compare this to say Vienna where the city council pays 69.9% of running costs!!!

see here for the full report with > 100 cities in Europe compared.
http://www.dttas.ie/upload/general/2567.pdf
(still a valid report abeit a little dated now)

Its unbelievable that Dublin Bus manages to put on a service as comprehensive as it does with such little subsidy and they should be applauded for doing so.
Privatising them wouldnt bring as much benefits as some seem to believe seeing as they receive such paltry subsidies as it is.

Irish rail though....
Theres a bottomless pit of 3 figure millions of subsidies per year where theres surely savings to be made, whether in its current makeup or a privatised structure.

n97 mini

munchkin_utd wrote: »

I do love the dublin bus bashing threads - especially when they are way off the mark!

Where's the Dublin Bus bashing?

monument

munchkin_utd wrote: »

I do love the dublin bus bashing threads - especially when they are way off the mark!

The subsidies for Dublin bus are 3.6% of operating costs.
Compare this to say Vienna where the city council pays 69.9% of running costs!!!

see here for the full report with > 100 cities in Europe compared.
http://www.dttas.ie/upload/general/2567.pdf
(still a valid report abeit a little dated now)

Its unbelievable that Dublin Bus manages to put on a service as comprehensive as it does with such little subsidy and they should be applauded for doing so.
Privatising them wouldnt bring as much benefits as some seem to believe seeing as they receive such paltry subsidies as it is.

Irish rail though....
Theres a bottomless pit of 3 figure millions of subsidies per year where theres surely savings to be made, whether in its current makeup or a privatised structure.

If you want to compare real costs to the state of Dublin Bus vs Irish Rail try adding in the cost of the QBCs and general road maintenance. The recent resurfacing in Dublin targeted at the main bus routes wasn't in the pennies or cents range even if you account for them doing whole roads and not just the parts buses use.

AngryLips

monument wrote: »

If you want to compare real costs to the state of Dublin Bus vs Irish Rail try adding in the cost of the QBCs and general road maintenance. The recent resurfacing in Dublin targeted at the main bus routes wasn't in the pennies or cents range even if you account for them doing whole roads and not just the parts buses use.

Isn't the whole concept of public transport that it is to some degree subsidised by private transport? Such as London's congestion charge.

The linked comparison above doesn't account for these additional costs with other operators therefore the comparison is still valid.

monument

AngryLips wrote: »

Isn't the whole concept of public transport that it is to some degree subsidised by private transport? Such as London's congestion charge.

The linked comparison above doesn't account for these additional costs with other operators therefore the comparison is still valid.

No, it's not.

The cost road repair and the cost of the damage of roads cause by buses is a real cost to the state.

bk

monument wrote: »

The cost road repair and the cost of the damage of roads cause by buses is a real cost to the state.

Compared to the damage done by private cars and trucks, buses do relatively little damage per person carried per km.

Either way you would still have to repair the roads for trucks and cars. It is a sunk cost.

On the other hand Irish Rail is the only user of the train tracks and therefore it represents a real cost.

You might say that is unfair, but we are looking at things from an economic point of view, fairness is irrelevant. Value for money is the most important in these difficult economic times.

dublinman1990

I would feel that also at looking at their financial situation, you may look at other aspects of the company

This is including their safety record, customer service, punctuality, work practices, legal proceedings (this specifically may have more cost a lot of money up to the present day),

For example, etchyed said about having the DB model similar to London. IMO, I would say that if could be workable if the ND programme which is failing either now or which may fail in future. I do realise that the current ND model is based on Census figures on 2006. We know that this model is being questioned on how drivers and fleet is being deployed on doing the routes (including dual garage operated routes). Their realiabilty and punctuality does need to be scrutinised quickly.

Little things like those points above can make this thread and the poll more interesting IMO.

monument

bk wrote: »

Compared to the damage done by private cars and trucks, buses do relatively little damage per person carried per km.

Either way you would still have to repair the roads for trucks and cars. It is a sunk cost.

On the other hand Irish Rail is the only user of the train tracks and therefore it represents a real cost.

You might say that is unfair, but we are looking at things from an economic point of view, fairness is irrelevant. Value for money is the most important in these difficult economic times.

No, it's not about fairness.

It's a real cost, no matter what way it is or isn't account for on a balance sheet -- heavy urban buses do substantial damage to roads. To be clear: I'm not saying it's a cost we should not pay or that is not worth it.

BrianD

Can't see it working as a private company. Public money going to pay private shareholders. What's the public benefit? None.

Would prefer a leaner and efficient bus company that remains in public ownership.

n97 mini

BrianD wrote: »

Can't see it working as a private company. Public money going to pay private shareholders. What's the public benefit? None.

Would prefer a leaner and efficient bus company that remains in public ownership.

Monopolies never result in the most cost effective solution.

Competition is the only way to ensure you're getting the best deal.

antoinolachtnai

munchkin_utd wrote: »

I do love the dublin bus bashing threads - especially when they are way off the mark!

The subsidies for Dublin bus are 3.6% of operating costs.
Compare this to say Vienna where the city council pays 69.9% of running costs!!!



see here for the full report with > 100 cities in Europe compared.
http://www.dttas.ie/upload/general/2567.pdf
(still a valid report abeit a little dated now)

Your information is wrong. The subsidy is over 30 percent (70m or so in direct subsidy, around 20m in capital grants)

In 2000 when your report was written, Dublin Bus got a much smaller subsidy, but carried a lot more passengers than it does today.

dublinman1990

Here is a poll update on Dublin Bus.

The poll does seem to be neck and neck at the moment with the latest results shown here. Updated at 12:10am.

Out of only 26 people, 10 respondants each (38.46%) are saying they want to see DB being fully privatised and Not privatised at all.

Only 6 of you (23.08%) said they wanted DB to be partly privatised.

Only 26 people voted is so far so good, So, make sure you can still vote if you wish.

Leave a optional comment also.

Thanks.

cson

No.

And I say that as a frequent user and often times lamenter of DB.

The only feasible way I could see it working is if you had the NRA as owner of the routes and they were sold in a package deal comprising profitable and non profitable routes with specific requirements detailing terms of service in the tender.

Its a minefield, so no.

The only other way is to effectively make redundant every person in DB and then presumably rehire them via an operator who tendered for the contract to operate DB. I don't really need to spell out the veritable apocalypse that would cause.

dublinman1990

Quote by cson

The only feasible way I could see it working is if you had the NRA as owner of the routes

I think you mean the NTA there cson.

People make mistakes all the time.

parsi

n97 mini wrote: »

BrianD wrote: »

Can't see it working as a private company. Public money going to pay private shareholders. What's the public benefit? None.

Would prefer a leaner and efficient bus company that remains in public ownership.

Monopolies never result in the most cost effective solution.

Competition is the only way to ensure you're getting the best deal.

I once thought that . Now I look at Berlin with a quasi-privatised system which was once a poster child but whose S-bahn has been an embarrassment for the past 3 years. So much so that the Berlin Senate is thinking about bringing it back into public control.

It's quite shocking to be honest. I certainly believed that the Germans has this whole thing cracked.

etchyed

cson wrote: »

The only feasible way I could see it working is if you had the NRA as owner of the routes and they were sold in a package deal comprising profitable and non profitable routes with specific requirements detailing terms of service in the tender.

8.3 Scheme: Dublin Bus Market
Proposal: Greater competition. Many of the Dublin Bus routes are perceived to be loss-making, making the Dublin Bus market an unattractive proposition for private operators. The Review Group on State Assets and Liabilities suggested a model whereby the formerly public company is privatised into a number of competing units and the regulator designs the network and tenders for the operation of the actual routes, which are open to all (private and former public sector providers). The companies tender for franchises and the package of routes is awarded to the company requiring the lowest subsidy. The Group recommended that the privatisation of all or part of Dublin Bus should be considered in due course, but only after government has decided on a model for competition in the Dublin bus market.

etchyed

n97 mini wrote: »

Competition is the only way to ensure you're getting the best deal.

Far far FAR too simplistic a way of looking at things when it comes to the provision of public transport.

n97 mini

parsi wrote: »

I once thought that . Now I look at Berlin with a quasi-privatised system which was once a poster child but whose S-bahn has been an embarrassment for the past 3 years. So much so that the Berlin Senate is thinking about bringing it back into public control.

It's quite shocking to be honest. I certainly believed that the Germans has this whole thing cracked.

Ok, so someone got it wrong (I'll have to take your word for it, I have no personal experience).

But who used competition and got it right?

The operation of Luas was put out to tender, and I think no-one (except one or two on here) would argue any CIE company is run better.

BrianD

n97 mini wrote: »

Monopolies never result in the most cost effective solution.

Competition is the only way to ensure you're getting the best deal.

But it doesn't work in public transport.

Competition on Dublin Bus routes between operators would be a waste of time and is proven so.

You can tender out routes but I'm unconvinced if this is a realistic proposal. You get an a few extra operators who don't have the economies of scale that the encumbent has. Whatever, chance of it working in a large market it's not going to work well in a small market. The LUAS is not a good example as Veoila only operate it. The infrastructure and rolling stock was built and paid for by the taxpayer.

The public only call for alternatives to DB when they go on strike. The majority would prefer an efficient and comprehensive service that can be delivered by a publicly owned monopoly.

Jaysoose

BrianD wrote: »

But it doesn't work in public transport.

Competition on Dublin Bus routes between operators would be a waste of time and is proven so.

You can tender out routes but I'm unconvinced if this is a realistic proposal. You get an a few extra operators who don't have the economies of scale that the encumbent has. Whatever, chance of it working in a large market it's not going to work well in a small market. The LUAS is not a good example as Veoila only operate it. The infrastructure and rolling stock was built and paid for by the taxpayer.

The public only call for alternatives to DB when they go on strike. The majority would prefer an efficient and comprehensive service that can be delivered by a publicly owned monopoly.

This is all the usual bluster and waffle trotted out about the public transport disaster that is dublin bus, the public want a comprehensive and efficient service but dublin bus will not deliver this as its an old boys club run by the unions for the staff.

Dublin bus cant deliver even an acceptable service when they are getting subsidised heavily by the goverment and have a monopoly.

Its about time this monopoly was broken and private operators at least given the oppurtunity to show that there are alternatives to this mediocre service currently being provided. Dublin bus are a joke of an organisation and the only people who's opinion seem to matter is those within dublin bus itself.

n97 mini

BrianD wrote: »

You can tender out routes but I'm unconvinced if this is a realistic proposal.

Explain. This is how it's done in other countries. The Swords Express here seems to have no problems either.

BrianD wrote: »

The LUAS is not a good example as Veoila only operate it.

It's a perfect example of an getting companies to compete by tendering! And the end result is better than anything involving CIE. Unless you think differently.

BrianD wrote: »

The majority would prefer an efficient and comprehensive service that can be delivered by a publicly owned monopoly.

The poll says otherwise. The majority want partial of full privatisation.

dowlingm

There are also options to part-privatised DB in other ways, such as contracting out the operation of garages.

miller50841

Cost effective measures should start at the top as salaries in this company and pensions for management are so unbelievable. Everybody always takes it out on the drivers who if were not there the others above would not be in a job either. Also there are the super checkers who are provided with fleet cars and can honestly say would not be run off there feet. Then we have the inspectors some are very good at dealing with any sort of people/problem but wages are very high here too. The driver is restricted to the hours they can work/drive and the hours done by the driver are extremely un social and very difficult to have any type of life outside of work. Going from late to early and some weeks early and late in same week. The whole system needs updating and needs someone with good and fresh ideas in management instead of the usuall lets get rid of some of our drivers a couple of years early as to save minimal money. Why not try get more to use the service and make it benefitial to do so come on get more on board save jobs and create jobs. Fares need to come down especially at a time where people are losing jobs and being hit with yet again more tax es and so called levy:mad:

AlekSmart

BrianD wrote: »

Can't see it working as a private company. Public money going to pay private shareholders. What's the public benefit? None.

Would prefer a leaner and efficient bus company that remains in public ownership.

Whilst many observers of our Public Transport systems tend to immediately jump on board a "Privatize It" bandwagon if it comes along,a pause for reflection can sometimes prove worthwhile.

It is perhaps noteworthy,that during Dublin Bus's lowest recent period,the flawed introduction of Phase 1 of Network Direct,the numbers of Private Operators who could be expected to take advantage of the quite obvious mess were scarce on the ground.

Unfortunately for many entreprenurial types,the modern Public Transport environment is no longer a licence to print money at the c.18% return on investment required by the larger entities such as First Group.

Even in jolly old Blighty,the home of the total-deregulation model so often referenced by modern-day observers,Nicholas Ridley's competitive privatization model remains hugely fraught with difficulties.

The UK's Bus Industry and the various interested bodies-stakeholders (Pasengers excepted) are still attempting to make sense of the Competition Commissions report into the industry,which has raised as many new issues as it has addressed.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/transport-committee/news/bus---tor/

The Office of Fair Trading had referred the issue of Local Bus Service provision to the UK's Competition Commission,but in so doing appears to have muddied the waters even more.

However,in what is probably a better barometer of how Public Bus Services should be structured,the French Government has introduced new legislation once again permitting Local Authorities to reassert control over Public Transport by means of Publicly Owned Corporations.

It is understood several French conurbations are now actively seeking to re-enter the Direct Provision of Bus & Tram Services after less than productive rersults from the dalliance with Privately operated services.

Oddly enough it appears that Veolia-Transdev is seeing a substantial down-turn in its fortunes both in Europe and the UK as it's fellow French (and State Controlled) Keolis group makes commensurate gains.

What all of this means for us is uncertain except to underline the reality of there being NO simple magic-pill which will provide passengers and posters with their every need satisfied.

For example one of the most interesting aspects of the issue is what is happening to the UK's National Free Bus Travel for Seniors scheme,the continuance of which is under no small threat due to "funding issues" resulting in private operators cutting less financially productive routes in order to maintain funding for Free Travel on their other commercial ones.

Our answers I believe are best sourced from within,to paraphrase CJ Haughey esq..."We need an Irish solution to an Irish problem",assuming,that is that we actually have a problem to begin with...:)

the groutch

with part-privatisiation you could easily end up with private companies taking over the "cash cow" routes, with taxpayers forking out even more to subsidise the loss-making routes that DB are left with
It's got to be all or nothing imo

markpb

the groutch wrote: »

with part-privatisiation you could easily end up with private companies taking over the "cash cow" routes, with taxpayers forking out even more to subsidise the loss-making routes that DB are left with

Why do people keep saying this as if a) makes sense or b) is the truth? It depends on how the government decide to do it. They could decide to tender individual routes (as picked by the government), they could bundle a mixture of quiet and busy routes together. They could tender out any route at all, pay the operator a fixed fee and take any cash received back to the government/NTA.

There are so many ways that this could happen that no-one can say for definite what the outcome will be. If you believe what the grouch says, I have shares in Anglo that are sure to go up in value soon!

patrickbrophy18

AlekSmart, I do see where you are coming from to an extent. However, I do think orbital bus routes are by and large, very scarce. For instance, the M50 sees heavy usage from motorists working along prominent business parks and industrial estates at peak times. This is mainly because the current public transport alternative takes twice and even three times as long. The unattractive nature of this alternative is anything but an incentive for motorists to switch to public transport.

Many of the existing orbital services are not frequent enough to give current motorists an incentive to use them. A lot of them are also infamous in their penchant for meandering through neighborhoods adding a lot of unnecessary length to their journey time. In many cases, the roads within these neighborhoods aren't even suitable for buses. Instead, this time could be better spent in adding more area coverage to these routes. The recent 46A rerouting is evidence that minor route tweaks can make a world of a difference from a commuter experience perspective. It is also one of the most frequent routes in Dublin Bus's arsenal and does phenomenally well.

At a time when evidence of global warming is rapidly stacking up, companies like Dublin Bus are axing routes or merging them with others which makes them longer and less attractive. Like it or not, timing as well as frequency are crucial factors when it comes to providing public transport. Otherwise, they are doomed for failure. It also doesn't help matters when the fares structure of public transport providers is inversely proportional to the level of service being provided. In other words, this is the biggest mockery to commuters and negates any effort made to reduce global warming.

A large amount of bus routes are often passed off as being unprofitable. More often than not, they are routes that operate at frequencies with intervals of 30 minutes or higher. Essentially, such routes are half assed attempts at creating connections between two points despite the fact that some of their alignments still have a huge amount of profitable potential. If you're living in the sticks, it is very different alright. As such, I would be completely in favor of privatizing such routes where the entrepreneur would more than likely listen to customers. At present, it is very hard for me to refrain from pointing out the lack there of as being such a huge flaw in Dublin Bus management.

Vic_08

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

AlekSmart, I do see where you are coming from to an extent. However, I do think orbital bus routes are by and large, very scarce. For instance, the M50 sees heavy usage from motorists working along prominent business parks and industrial estates at peak times. This is mainly because the current public transport alternative takes twice and even three times as long. The unattractive nature of this alternative is anything but an incentive for motorists to switch to public transport.

Many of the existing orbital services are not frequent enough to give current motorists an incentive to use them. A lot of them are also infamous in their penchant for meandering through neighborhoods adding a lot of unnecessary length to their journey time.

That is all very well but it is those neighbourhoods where people live, not the M50, ORR or other trunk orbital roads.

It is easy to criticise the poor orbital routes but I challenge anyone to design a cost-effective orbital network that will provide a reasonable alternative to car commuting for a reasonable % of Suburb-Suburb commuters.

patrickbrophy18

Vic_08 wrote: »

I challenge anyone to design a cost-effective orbital network that will provide a reasonable alternative to car commuting for a reasonable % of Suburb-Suburb commuters.

I took a stab at it a while back with a route entitle 675. Here is the link to the route below:

http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004a0320b54a628da632&msa=0

Here are two other ones (More of a BRT type system down the line):

• Line 1

• Line 1:
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b86514c62a2ab6a86&msa=0&ll=53.346657,-6.349754&spn=0.113135,0.308647
• Line 1(Extension):
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b86519dd54b7fa3df&msa=0&ll=53.346657,-6.349754&spn=0.113135,0.308647

• Line 2

• Line 2:
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b8651c2ceebab109f&msa=0&ll=53.346657,-6.349754&spn=0.113135,0.308647
• Line 2(Extension):
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b86521ccede7fc84c&msa=0&ll=53.415262,-6.349754&spn=0.112953,0.308647

Both of them begin their journey's in Tallaght. One of them ends in Ballycoolin while the other ends in Damastown. As you can see, each orbital route travels the most direct path and passed by highly populated areas and major commercial hubs.

Vic_08

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

I took a stab at it a while back with a route entitle 675. Here is the link to the route below:

http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004a0320b54a628da632&msa=0

Here are two other ones (More of a BRT type system down the line):

• Line 1

• Line 1:
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b86514c62a2ab6a86&msa=0&ll=53.346657,-6.349754&spn=0.113135,0.308647
• Line 1(Extension):
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b86519dd54b7fa3df&msa=0&ll=53.346657,-6.349754&spn=0.113135,0.308647

• Line 2

• Line 2:
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b8651c2ceebab109f&msa=0&ll=53.346657,-6.349754&spn=0.113135,0.308647
• Line 2(Extension):
  http://maps.google.ie/maps/ms?msid=215589939986025118930.0004b86521ccede7fc84c&msa=0&ll=53.415262,-6.349754&spn=0.112953,0.308647

Both of them begin their journey's in Tallaght. One of them ends in Ballycoolin while the other ends in Damastown. As you can see, each orbital route travels the most direct path and passed by highly populated areas and major commercial hubs.

That is basically a 75X route with the middle section bypassed to provide a quicker journey DunLaoghaire/Foxrock-Tallaght. Nothing wrong with that per-se but it only provides for a small % of residential working in a small % of commercial. Extrapolate that across the city and you will need dozens of similar routes to get anywhere near covering a good % of M50 based journeys.

Concentrating alone on DunLaoghaire, at least another 4 routes would be needed, exiting the M50 at other junctions to cover the other main employment centres. Then you need to do the same to connect every other suburb to each main centre, how many routes will that be? 20,30? Even at that they would not be competitive with car for journey times for most people.

I am not criticising your idea in particular, nor do I think the current orbital routes are good enough. I just don't see how the orbital commute can ever be realistically catered for by public transport. Barring a complete ban on private cars and forcing everyone to use PT it is not going to happen. The manner in which the city has been developed in the last 30 years has been entirely based on the car, trying to drop a universal public transport system on top of that is practically impossible.

Transportuser09

Luas does appear to be well run. But it is a very simple system compared to that of Dublin Bus. We cant say that Veoila would or wouldnt operate a more complex system as effeciently. And didnt they get into trouble for poor performance in the UK (as Connex)?

dfx-

(c) for me. I don't see what privatisation brings to the customer than DB doesn't. I'd equate customers voting for privatisation as turkeys voting for Christmas.

I'd wager you'd be fobbed off even quicker if anything. They won't be responsible or reportable to anyone.

CelticRambler

Public transport should be in public ownership. With the benefit of a (sometimes) returned emigrant's perspective, DB has improved immensely in recent years - I'd rank it with some of the better systems I've seen around Europe, certainly way ahead of the privatised mess in the UK.

Public transport should not be (just) about making money, but also a tool for shaping behaviour. Private ownership won't allow that - routes will be exploited to within a cent of their profitability and anything that threatens that will be rejected. But it's the "experimental" routes that can lead to longer term change, balanced by a handful of "legacy" routes to keep the old dears happy until they go into a home.

Government needs to be able to decide and implement that kind of strategy. Of course whether it does or not is another matter, but private enterprise won't.

CIE

CelticRambler wrote: »

Public transport should be in public ownership. With the benefit of a (sometimes) returned emigrant's perspective, DB has improved immensely in recent years - I'd rank it with some of the better systems I've seen around Europe, certainly way ahead of the privatised mess in the UK.

Public transport should not be (just) about making money, but also a tool for shaping behaviour. Private ownership won't allow that - routes will be exploited to within a cent of their profitability and anything that threatens that will be rejected. But it's the "experimental" routes that can lead to longer term change, balanced by a handful of "legacy" routes to keep the old dears happy until they go into a home.

Government needs to be able to decide and implement that kind of strategy. Of course whether it does or not is another matter, but private enterprise won't.

With all due respect, what are you basing that opinion on? With the "shaping behaviour" and "keeping old dears happy till (we put them into) a home" bits, sounds like you're on the left-wing totalitarian side of the political equation, and that won't get you many friends here. The UK does not have full privatisation, so that example is not valid. Your rhetoric makes it sound like we'll end up with public-run taxis, and all private bus companies nationalised as well as the airlines re-nationalised; no thanks.

The modes of transport we now call "public" all started as private concerns, whether road or rail. There is no incidence of it being started by any government. Anything that government does today is in imitation of past practice by private companies, and the only reason that said private companies could not sustain themselves was via excessive governmental regulation. And frankly, there is nothing wrong with maximising revenue as long as it does not reach into the criminal element—which is the only time that the government should step in, not to control behaviour that is not criminal or to do any other cradle-to-grave nanny-statism.

Jehuty42

CIE wrote: »

Anything that government does today is in imitation of past practice by private companies, and the only reason that said private companies could not sustain themselves was via excessive governmental regulation.

That's a pretty incredible claim. What private companies are we talking about here?

On a broader note, it is my opinion and observation that Irish people want big government and cradle-to-grave nanny-statism, they want the council to clean up after them, they want their bus operators to operate loss-making PSO routes to small villages, they want a free and efficient public health system, they want government to subsidise university fees for students up to and including 100%. When we have a problem of pretty much any size, we write to our TDs to get them to fix it or legislate for it. We do not seem to be a country with much leaning towards pure capitalism or libertarianism.

CIE

Jehuty42 wrote: »

That's a pretty incredible claim. What private companies are we talking about here?

What's an incredible claim? Unless you mean that DUTC (and its predecessors) and GSR (and its predecessors) were not private companies at all? nor the other bus companies, such as Paragon Omnibus (who operated what would become route 65)?

Now to me, what would be an "incredible claim" would be saying that the government ever innovated when it came to public transport. If anything, the government inhibits innovation.

Jehuty42 wrote: »

On a broader note, it is my opinion and observation that Irish people want big government and cradle-to-grave nanny-statism, they want the council to clean up after them, they want their bus operators to operate loss-making PSO routes to small villages, they want a free and efficient public health system, they want government to subsidise university fees for students up to and including 100%. When we have a problem of pretty much any size, we write to our TDs to get them to fix it or legislate for it. We do not seem to be a country with much leaning towards pure capitalism or libertarianism.

Well then, the country will end up with the kind of subjugation that comes with that. In fact, the country is already so subjugated, because you cannot be independent with that kind of outlook.

Capt'n Midnight

the groutch wrote: »

with part-privatisiation you could easily end up with private companies taking over the "cash cow" routes, with taxpayers forking out even more to subsidise the loss-making routes that DB are left with
It's got to be all or nothing imo

If it's all or nothing then expect the operator to try every and reduce losses on the loss making services.

it's that simple

Capt'n Midnight

Transportuser09 wrote: »

Luas does appear to be well run. But it is a very simple system compared to that of Dublin Bus. We cant say that Veoila would or wouldnt operate a more complex system as effeciently. And didnt they get into trouble for poor performance in the UK (as Connex)?

"Here's a €600m train set , have fun"