12% Increase in Transport Tourism and Sport Funding

devnull

From Budget 2018:
http://www.dttas.ie/press-releases/2017/ministers-welcome-12-increase-dttas-budget-2018

The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport Shane Ross T.D. and Minister of State for Tourism and Sport Brendan Griffin T.D. today welcomed the additional funding agreed by the Government for their Department’s programmes out to 2021. Total funding for the Department’s programmes next year is €2.03 billion, which is €215m more than the 2017 allocation.

It represents almost 12% (€215m) increase on gross expenditure levels over 2017. This allocation will provide the resources to target investment in our transport network, support our tourism sector and promote sport to drive our country forward.

The additional €63m will enable additional funding for Public Service Obligation payments, to support the continued delivery of these socially necessary but financially unviable services that have grown in recent years, and to facilitate some further expansion including the commencement next year of the planned roll-out of bus market opening. It will fund necessary repairs to roads following the Donegal flooding and facilitate Brexit proofing through the provision of additional funding for Tourism Marketing.

The newly increased allocation of €2.03bn will allow the Department to
- address emerging capacity constraints on our public transport systems – within Dublin and across the regions;
- step up investment in climate friendly and sustainable transport solutions;
- remove bottlenecks in the existing road network;
- build further on the recent success of our tourism industry; and
- provide for improved sports facilities

Speaking today Minister Ross said; “This year, as part of the Capital Plan I am delighted to be in a position to be able to announce ambitious projects which include: a spend of over €100 million on vital local and national sports infrastructure, investment of over €30 million in the development of Greenways to bring tourism benefits to regional locations and the provision of infrastructure to support safe and sustainable commuting by cycling or walking in urban areas to a value of €80 million over the period.”

Both Ministers will outline in further detail the allocation of these funds and the increases across the Capital Plan out to 2021 in a dedicated public address on Wednesday 11 October.

From reading it I would expect it to be announced tomorrow how the funding may be broken down and what will be allocated to what areas.

marno21

Some of this is going towards the M7 Naas/Newbridge bypass upgrade scheme (incompassing the new junction and the Sallins bypass).

DTTAS asked for additional funding as part of the Capital Plan review, 20 items in fact. They are ordered in priority as follows:

1. Introduction of variable speed limits on the M50.
2. Energy reduction programme on roads
3. Reintroduction of local improvement scheme & drainage works
4. Master Licence Record Project*
5. IDA Priority Link road schemes (Tralee & Sligo)
6. M11/N11 capacity improvements around Bray
7. R498 Latteragh realignment
8. TII Minor safety realignments
9. N52 Ardee bypass
10. Winter maintenance fleet renewal
11. M20 Cork-Limerick planning
12. N40 Demand Management system
13. Coonagh-Knockalisheen Phase 2 & Killaloe bypass acceleration
14. N69 Listowel bypass
15. Road planning of 13 new major roads projects (N5 Ballaghaderren-Scramoge & N69 Listowel; N2 Clontibret-NI, N4 Mullingar-Longford, M11 Oilgate, N13/N56 Letterkenny, N14 Letterkenny-Lifford, N15 Ballybofey, N17 Tuam-Collooney, M20, N21 Abbeyfeale/Newcastlewest, N24 Cahir-LJ)
16. Carrigaline western relief road, Cork Science & Technology Park access & Thurles relief road
17. Accelerated delivery of N4 Collooney-Castlebaldwin
18. Accelerated delivery of N5 Westport-Turlough
19. Accelerated delivery of N22 Macroom-Ballyvourney
20. Accelerated delivery of N59 Moycullen bypass

schemingbohemia

That's only the roads "ask", not the PT or Cycling.

devnull

Confirmation on some of the projects being funded
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/metro-north-to-open-by-2027-in-climate-friendly-overhaul-36219519.html

Construction work on Metro North will begin in 2021 and the light rail system will be open for business six years later, the Government has announced.

A €750m complete redesign of the capital's bus network, more than €110m for walking and cycling facilities in the cities, and improvements to the rail network will make a four-year transport investment programme the "most climate-friendly" ever, Transport Minister Shane Ross claimed.
Announcing a €7.5bn investment programme out to 2021, Mr Ross also said that construction of Metro North will begin in 2021, along with a €4.2bn roads package to tackle bottlenecks.

The amount to be spent on public transport is €2.7bn, with another €215m for sport and €168m for tourism. The Department of Transport will also fund a €35m scheme to back new ideas to help decarbonise the transport sector.

Zebra3

"Most climate friendly" and €4.2Bn for roads? :rolleyes:

marno21

Zebra3 wrote: »

"Most climate friendly" and €4.2Bn for roads? :rolleyes:

There's more than cars on the roads. Goods vehicles and buses use them too.

end of the road

marno21 wrote: »

There's more than cars on the roads. Goods vehicles and buses use them too.

that doesn't negate what he said though, which is still correct and valid. the idea that this transport investment program is the most climate friendly while spending 4 billion on roads does not work and is an invalid claim. it's the climate friendly card being played that is the problem, not the projects themselves as we don't know exactly what they are yet.

devnull

I think Rail needs more investment in this country as well but it has to be targeted, we've certainly seen more rail investment in the last few years than the previous few and Light Rail as well, but we need more, certainly.

Irish Rail got over a 30% increase in subsidy last year by the way, in addition to capital investment in Phoenix Park Tunnel, getting the 2700s back into service, possible more ICR sets and a few other projects.

Just have to hope Metro North is built and it's not another false dawn.

Idbatterim

what is happening about later buses and luas in dublin on certain routes, finishing at 11:30pm for bus is a joke...

devnull

Idbatterim wrote: »

what is happening about later buses and luas in dublin on certain routes, finishing at 11:30pm for bus is a joke...

Don't know about the LUAS, but with the Buses there have been issues with rosters according to the Unions in June.
http://dublinbusdrivers.com/Post_2330_Departures.html

As you are aware there has been several discussions, both centrally and locally, in relation to journeys commencing post 23.30 hours.

This Union’s stance is and has always been that no P.S.O. journeys can commence post 23.30 hours. We do however accept that over the years Reps have entered into local agreements to allow some post 23.30 hours journeys as they were contained in exceptionally good schedules which delivered improved work-life balance to our members. In circumstances where Management attempts to introduce unacceptable schedules which propose post 23.30 hours journeys our stance will remain as above – i.e. No Agreement.

In relation to the commercial routes, this Union attended a central meeting in the last 2 years, in good faith, and agreed it was in everyone’s interest to agree to post 23.30 hours journeys if acceptable schedules were proposed with improved work-life balance (please note our committee’s stance differs from our sister Unions stance).

Since the introduction of the new 747 schedules, drivers have refused to operated journeys which commence post 23.30 hours until the Company introduce an acceptable schedule.

At a recent meeting with the Company a compromise was reached that was acceptable to all. It must be stressed that the agreement reached is only for Route 747 (a Commercial Route) and furthermore the agreement reached is only for this proposed 747 schedule, it does not in any way dilute our stance on journeys commencing post 23.30 hours on either commercial or P.S.O. routes. Where the Company wishes to introduce such arrangements in any depot on any route it must be by agreement with this Union.

Please be advised, that in future if any journeys commencing post 23.30 hours are agreed locally, SIPTU’s central committee holds the right to rescind such local agreements and under no circumstances will any post 23.30 hours journeys set a precedent going forward.

Not sure if anything has changed since then.

Idbatterim

even if the luas ran every half hour, it would be great! Didnt I read the state would maintain ownership of new buses. so tender these new night routes out, simple as, or not?

L1011

It would be implausible from a maintenance perspective alone to take buses from an operator to give to another for the night and then take them back again. Night routes will have to be run by a daytime operator, likely the same one as the day route but it could be swapped around - particularly as some routes won't match up fully.

Buses granted to DB for daytime routes won't be used by another operator overnight effectively.

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

I think Rail needs more investment in this country as well but it has to be targeted, we've certainly seen more rail investment in the last few years than the previous few and Light Rail as well, but we need more, certainly.

Irish Rail got over a 30% increase in subsidy last year by the way, in addition to capital investment in Phoenix Park Tunnel, getting the 2700s back into service, possible more ICR sets and a few other projects.

Just have to hope Metro North is built and it's not another false dawn.

agreed. the infrastructure issues must be the next big thing to deal with now in terms of the railway. finishing the krp and at least some attempt to deal with the connolly and associated suburban line capacity issues.

Idbatterim wrote: »

even if the luas ran every half hour, it would be great! Didnt I read the state would maintain ownership of new buses. so tender these new night routes out, simple as, or not?

much simpler and cheaper to sort out any rostering issues. if the staff work life balance isn't effected by later schedules then the unions and staff will agree to work them. an agreement was made in relation to the 747, so there is riggel room to be made regardless of the particular union's stance. stances can and do change.

bk

L1011 wrote: »

It would be implausible from a maintenance perspective alone to take buses from an operator to give to another for the night and then take them back again. Night routes will have to be run by a daytime operator, likely the same one as the day route but it could be swapped around - particularly as some routes won't match up fully.

Buses granted to DB for daytime routes won't be used by another operator overnight effectively.

I don't see why it couldn't be done from a maintenance perspective!

Only 40% of DB's fleet operates all day, the other 60% sits in the depots during off peak hours. It would be relatively easy for maintenance to be done on these buses during the off peak hours and then head out over night. This would have an overall effect of creating utilisation of the buses.

This is how it is done every day in London.

Having said that with GoAhead having 10% of the fleet, they might jump at using their buses on contracted overnight routes. No one is saying you need 100% of the buses for night time services. I'd say 100 would be plenty for a 30 minute frequency on the 16 core routes.

L1011

The operator is responsible for maintenance - splitting operators would cause admin nightmares. It's not about time

Claude Wilton

devnull wrote: »

I think Rail needs more investment in this country as well but it has to be targeted, we've certainly seen more rail investment in the last few years than the previous few and Light Rail as well, but we need more, certainly.

Irish Rail got over a 30% increase in subsidy last year by the way, in addition to capital investment in Phoenix Park Tunnel, getting the 2700s back into service, possible more ICR sets and a few other projects.

Just have to hope Metro North is built and it's not another false dawn.

Re Metro North - putting a start date of 2021 guarantees another round of post-general election interference in its implementation. Shame Official Ireland dismantled the Dublin Rail Rapid Transit System proposals - we're still dealing with their repercussions forty years later.

devnull

Shane Ross Speech on Budget 2018 (Transport parts) and spending areas:
http://www.dttas.ie/speeches/2017/minister-ross-budget-2018-speech

My top priority over the next few years is to rapidly increase investment in public transport while also increasing public transport services. Next year, I will invest over €400 million in public transport infrastructure, and this will rise to over €500m in 2019, over €700 million in 2020 and almost 1.1 billion in 2021. That is a four-year capital envelope for public transport of over 2.7 billion euro. It represents a 275 percent increase in investment over that period; and it is a clear signal of the importance the Government is putting on providing good public transport. I am particularly pleased that this substantial allocation allows me to invest in a much needed, fundamental overhaul of the bus network in Dublin, which will make it faster, more reliable, convenient and affordable.

I am allocating more than three-quarters of a billion euro for the BusConnects programme; a transformative investment package that will finance new and expanded bus routes and greatly improve bus access through and around the Capital. This programme represents the most integrated investment programme ever undertaken in bus transport in the Capital. It recognises that we need to do much more that simply add more buses to the existing network, with all of its inherent bottlenecks and other constraints. It is about adding more buses to a system that is reformed to ensure that it flows better, so that we actually carry many more passengers and get them to their destination quicker.

In relation to public transport services, in 2018 we will be providing an 8 percent increase in overall funding to support Public Service Obligation services. This will enable the continued delivery of socially necessary but financially unviable services throughout the country. Such PSO services have grown in recent years, and the increase in funding in 2018 is a cumulative increase over three years (2016-2018) of €75 million, or 36%.

The 2018 funding will also facilitate some further expansion, including the commencement next year of the planned roll-out of bus market opening, part of which will involve increased frequency on a number of core routes.

With regard to rail, there will be over 680 million euro capital investment in additional rail infrastructure between now and 2021. This will deliver additional Luas capacity on top of the soon-to-be complete Luas Cross-City project, which will be a hugely beneficial addition to the public transport system in our Capital City. This amount will also help fund additional trams and longer trams across the entire Luas network.It will also fund the City Centre Re-signalling Project to improve speeds through the central Dublin part of the mainline rail network, and a new Central Traffic Control Centre which will enable the DART Expansion Programme to progress, and it will help improve national rail movements too.Additional funding will also increase the rail fleet and allow further progress to be made on the electrification of both the Northern rail line to Balbriggan and the Maynooth line. Further funding commitments for electrification of the Kildare line to Hazelhatch as part of Dart Expansion will be considered in the context of the 10 year capital plan. We are continuing to invest strongly in maintenance and safety projects to keep our national railway system safe and effective.

With today’s 4-year capital envelope, we are progressing preparation of the Metro North; construction work on this project will start in 2021, with passenger services starting in 2027. The 10-year capital plan to be published in the coming months will include the funding for the period to complete this significant addition to public transport. I also expect to include a number of other significant major investments in that forthcoming 10-year plan.

Transport is not just for the able-bodied, every citizen must be able to avail of public transport with as much ease as possible. To that end, while all accessibility is designed into new public transport projects, I am also providing multi-annual funding of almost 30 million euro over the next four years for retro-fitting of older existing public transport facilities to improve accessibility. This effectively doubles the previously planned investment amount.

wordofwarning

Idbatterim wrote: »

what is happening about later buses and luas in dublin on certain routes, finishing at 11:30pm for bus is a joke...

Im sure most TDs think Dublin should be grateful to have public transport in the first place. Why should Dublin get late buses when rural Donegal doesn't? Dublin can't have nice things, as rural TDs are bitter about how Dublin has decent services. The elephant in the room is that Dublin pays for it all themselves ie the subsidy for rural school transport is like €80m per year, while the subsidy for Dublin bus is a fraction of that

IMO LPT needs to be ring fenced for the authority it was raised in. There needs to be a floor on it, but let LAs set the rates themselves. I think most Dubliners would happily pay a higher LPT for a better public transport system. Dubliners could fund a better transport system with their own taxes.

I also think LPT rates should have been adjusted in areas with the new luas extension. A sizeable amount of DCC are going to benefit from a Luas on their door step, have higher property values, yet won't a pay more in LPT. Cities like NYC fund their transport extensions based on the fact, their property tax take will increase and cover so of the cost of construction.

Corca Baiscinn

wordofwarning wrote: »

Im sure most TDs think Dublin should be grateful to have public transport in the first place. Why should Dublin get late buses when rural Donegal doesn't? Dublin can't have nice things, as rural TDs are bitter about how Dublin has decent services. The elephant in the room is that Dublin pays for it all themselves ie the subsidy for rural school transport is like €80m per year, while the subsidy for Dublin bus is a fraction of that

IMO LPT needs to be ring fenced for the authority it was raised in. There needs to be a floor on it, but let LAs set the rates themselves. I think most Dubliners would happily pay a higher LPT for a better public transport system. Dubliners could fund a better transport system with their own taxes. .

I appreciate that Dublin's P/T provision is inadequate, someone who travelled into town on an early morning bus last week told me that it was standing room only and remarked that if Leo wanted people to get up early in the morning he should provide transport for them. However, while I agree with you re the Luas in Longford and Motorway in Mayo mentality not being helpful you are essentially arguing against Regional Transfers, which while controversial are commonplace, whether from Catalonia to the rest of Spain, Northern Italy to the south, First World to Third, or from Dublin to the Regions.
Many of the lads and lasses who pay LPT in Dublin have parents, grandparents or siblings down the country who also need infrastructure. And think about it, if Rural Ireland becomes depopulated because the wealthier part stops subsidising it and it can't raise all the necessary funds itself there will be various consequences including -
1.More migration to the cities , thus more pressure on infrastructure including P/T
2.A countryside that will revert to scrub land, so no recreational lung/holiday homes for city-dwellers
3. a lack of home-grown food so more reliance on imports

given the above, imo the trade-off of cash for countryside is worth it but I agree with you re the foolishness of rural TD's seeking grandiose projects just because "them above in Dublin" are getting one.

bk

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

However, while I agree with you re the Luas in Longford and Motorway in Mayo mentality not being helpful you are essentially arguing against Regional Transfers, which while controversial are commonplace, whether from Catalonia to the rest of Spain, Northern Italy to the south, First World to Third, or from Dublin to the Regions.

No it is not!

The absolutely biggest trend in demographics over the last 100 years across Europe and the world is urbanisation.

Whether we like it or not the world is urbanising (most of Europe already has) and we will too. There is little that can be done to stop it and the sooner we admit that then the better for everyone.

Corca Baiscinn

bk wrote: »

No it is not!

The absolutely biggest trend in demographics over the last 100 years across Europe and the world is urbanisation.

Whether we like it or not the world is urbanising (most of Europe already has) and we will too. There is little that can be done to stop it and the sooner we admit that then the better for everyone.

I'm not arguing against against either the facts or the desire for urbanisation. I said Regional Transfers are commonplace albeit controversial. And I mentioned some of the downsides I foresee if the entire population of Rural Ireland moves to the better off cities.

bk

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I'm not arguing against against either the facts or the desire for urbanisation. I said Regional Transfers are commonplace albeit controversial. And I mentioned some of the downsides I foresee if the entire population of Rural Ireland moves to the better off cities.

Fair enough, let me deal with your points:

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

1.More migration to the cities , thus more pressure on infrastructure including P/T

Densification is what makes public transport economic and successful. Just look at London and the underground or any big city.

The big problem we have is the large number of people living in one off houses spread through out rural Ireland and then commuting to the jobs in the cities every day.

Getting people to actually live in our cities and not just work there is actually the solution, not the problem.

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

2.A countryside that will revert to scrub land, so no recreational lung/holiday homes for city-dwellers

Brilliant from an environmental point of view. Returns our countryside to wildlife and nature.

As a person who loves hiking almost every weekend, their is nothing worse then the horrible one off houses littering all our country roads, making the countryside actually inaccessible to people and nature.

Go to Wales or Scotland to see how fantastic low population countryside is for nature, wildlife and along with rambling laws allows people to actually enjoy it.

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

3. a lack of home-grown food so more reliance on imports

No one is saying we wouldn't have farmers or farming of the country side (our public transport for them). The problem is what I mentioned above, the people who don't actually work in the countryside. The people who are using it for just cheap property.

This is why I say the sooner we accept the reality of urbanisation the better. We can actually make the life of people who actually work and live in the countryside better if we are honest about all this and plan for it correctly.

Geuze

wordofwarning wrote: »

IMO LPT needs to be ring fenced for the authority it was raised in. There needs to be a floor on it, but let LAs set the rates themselves. I think most Dubliners would happily pay a higher LPT for a better public transport system. Dubliners could fund a better transport system with their own taxes.

I also think LPT rates should have been adjusted in areas with the new luas extension. A sizeable amount of DCC are going to benefit from a Luas on their door step, have higher property values, yet won't a pay more in LPT. Cities like NYC fund their transport extensions based on the fact, their property tax take will increase and cover so of the cost of construction.

80% of LPT stays in each LA.

The 20% LPT goes into a central pool, to be redistributed to weaker LA.

DCC voted to cut their LPT rate by the max allowed, 15%.

wordofwarning

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Many of the lads and lasses who pay LPT in Dublin have parents, grandparents or siblings down the country who also need infrastructure.

What is wrong with people in the arsehole of nowhere paying a bit more for the burden they inflict on society? I am not buying that a low income single mother who scraped together the money to buy her council house in Dublin should pay twice the LPT as a wealthy farmer living in a McMansion in the west, as it is the right thing...

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

1.More migration to the cities , thus more pressure on infrastructure including P/T

Or look at it this way, it is far cheaper to provide services to dense areas than lower density areas. The cost of maintaining roads per capita in Dublin is literally a fraction of maintaining roads in the likes of Leitrim. Imagine how many rural hospitals, post offices, school etc which are all inefficient, if there was a mass migration to Dublin.

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

2.A countryside that will revert to scrub land, so no recreational lung/holiday homes for city-dwellers

I can live with that one...

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

3. a lack of home-grown food so more reliance on imports

Im sorry to break it to you, but Dublin is the bread basket of Ireland. North County Dublin produces most of the fruit and veg for Ireland. A lot of the West is horrible quality land. It is naive to think farmers in Cork and Tipp will give up their 400 acre highly profitable farm.

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

given the above, imo the trade-off of cash for countryside is worth it

It is disgraceful a struggling single mother will pay more LPT on her shack of a house in Dublin when a rich farmer will next to nothing on his mansion. But hey, it is the rich farmers who need the handouts from society...

wordofwarning

Geuze wrote: »

80% of LPT stays in each LA.

The result is most Dubliners are paying more LPT to rural councils, than resident in rural councils are paying in LPT. Dublin needs 100% LPT for things like social housing rather than giving it to a weak LA as they were incapable of managing their finances during the boom.

end of the road

wordofwarning wrote: »

Im sure most TDs think Dublin should be grateful to have public transport in the first place. Why should Dublin get late buses when rural Donegal doesn't? Dublin can't have nice things, as rural TDs are bitter about how Dublin has decent services. The elephant in the room is that Dublin pays for it all themselves ie the subsidy for rural school transport is like €80m per year, while the subsidy for Dublin bus is a fraction of that

IMO LPT needs to be ring fenced for the authority it was raised in. There needs to be a floor on it, but let LAs set the rates themselves. I think most Dubliners would happily pay a higher LPT for a better public transport system. Dubliners could fund a better transport system with their own taxes.

I also think LPT rates should have been adjusted in areas with the new luas extension. A sizeable amount of DCC are going to benefit from a Luas on their door step, have higher property values, yet won't a pay more in LPT. Cities like NYC fund their transport extensions based on the fact, their property tax take will increase and cover so of the cost of construction.

the people cannot afford the lpd.

wordofwarning wrote: »

The result is most Dubliners are paying more LPT to rural councils, than resident in rural councils are paying in LPT.

blame the market. + the people cannot afford to pay any more regardless of where they are from.

wordofwarning wrote: »

Dublin needs 100% LPT for things like social housing rather than giving it to a weak LA as they were incapable of managing their finances during the boom.

it doesn't need 100% of it's lpd. dublin isn't giving a small percentage of it's lpd to a weak council because they were in-capible of managing their finances as dublin wasn't exactly fantastic at managing it's finances either, but because the biggest economy's job in a state is to help the whole country.

end of the road

wordofwarning wrote: »

What is wrong with people in the arsehole of nowhere paying a bit more for the burden they inflict on society?

they pay enough for the non-burdin they don't inflict on society.

wordofwarning wrote: »

I am not buying that a low income single mother who scraped together the money to buy her council house in Dublin should pay twice the LPT as a wealthy farmer living in a McMansion in the west, as it is the right thing...

buy it as that is how it is for a reason. if you want to live in dublin you are going to pay more that is how it is all around the world due to various factors that aren't easy to change. aka market forces. the market doesn't do fairness.

wordofwarning wrote: »

Or look at it this way, it is far cheaper to provide services to dense areas than lower density areas. The cost of maintaining roads per capita in Dublin is literally a fraction of maintaining roads in the likes of Leitrim. Imagine how many rural hospitals, post offices, school etc which are all inefficient, if there was a mass migration to Dublin.

would bring little savings as the costs in dublin would shoot up in line with the market.

wordofwarning wrote: »

I can live with that one...

well others couldn't.

wordofwarning wrote: »

Im sorry to break it to you, but Dublin is the bread basket of Ireland. North County Dublin produces most of the fruit and veg for Ireland. A lot of the West is horrible quality land. It is naive to think farmers in Cork and Tipp will give up their 400 acre highly profitable farm.

no it isn't. the country side is the bread basket as it's not just fruit and vedge people eat. dublin produces mostly non indigenous fruit and vedge or quick grow stuff. so the other poster's post is still accurate.

wordofwarning wrote: »

It is disgraceful a struggling single mother will pay more LPT on her shack of a house in Dublin when a rich farmer will next to nothing on his mansion. But hey, it is the rich farmers who need the handouts from society...

that's just tough. the market says those who live in prime saught after locations must pay more. the so called rich farmers are mostly only asset rich, not actually cash rich. the subsidies are to insure good high quality food.