Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Regional flights 'damaging environment'

  • 18-03-2005 1:05pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,028
    ✭✭✭


    I think this is an interesting spin on things. Why subsidise internal flights to compete with rail and bus?

    http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1359907&issue_id=12219
    Regional flights 'damaging environment'
    FLIGHTS from Dublin to regional airports are harmful to the environment and should not be subsidised at the expense of cleaner forms of transport, according to a submission to the EU Commission.
    The Environmental group Friends of the Irish Environment (FIE) says short haul flights lead to a greater level of emissions and should not be subsidised at the expense of rail travel, which it argues is more environmentally friendly.
    FIE have written to both the European Commission's Regional Directorate and the Environmental Directorate as well as to Transport Minister Martin Cullen formally complaining about the use of public funds to subsidise such flights.
    What has sparked the group's anger are recent announcements of tenders for the proposed Public Service Obligations to fund the subsidies.
    The group claims that emissions from short haul flights such as those between Dublin and Galway and Dublin and Knock are six times greater per kilometre than emissions from rail.
    "Subsidies for internal short haul flights are a socially regressive transfer of wealth from the exchequer to the higher income users of the service," said FIE in a statement last night.


Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,346 dowlingm
    ✭✭✭


    Because they aren't competing with rail and bus. PSO routes have regulated pricing which is why fares are nearly comparable with the train. When you fly, you have an allocated seat and the toilet is likely to be clean, two things rail has not historically provided. Air passengers pay for navigation charges, airport charges and government taxes.

    When rail has allocated seating on all intercity and a direct link to Dublin and/or Shannon, then it *might* be able to compete. We're not there yet!

    I love all these FIE types, bet they don't fly anywhere, oh no.

    So the IDA wants a multinational to locate in Galway, so the exec flies into Dublin and then gets on a bus? Fugettaboutit!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,028 ishmael whale
    ✭✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    Because they aren't competing with rail and bus.
    I suppose the point is that, instead of subsidising internal PSO routes, those resources could be put into a higher quality rail service. As I understand it the subsidy paid is typically a multiple of the ticket price so any taxes/charges included in the price paid by passengers on these routes doesn’t particular impinge.
    dowlingm wrote:
    I love all these FIE types, bet they don't fly anywhere, oh no.
    As I take it their point is simply that short haul flights are particularly polluting, and so query why the Government are targeting subsidies at them.
    dowlingm wrote:
    So the IDA wants a multinational to locate in Galway, so the exec flies into Dublin and then gets on a bus? Fugettaboutit!

    I take it if it was Galway they’d be flying into Dublin and taking a train but, in fairness, that’s not your point. But if proximity to a significant airport is important to a particular enterprise, then maybe they shouldn’t locate in Galway


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 Metrobest
    ✭✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    So the IDA wants a multinational to locate in Galway, so the exec flies into Dublin and then gets on a bus? Fugettaboutit!

    I'm sorry. But why should Irish taxpayers subsidise rich businessmen who want the champagne/oysters treatment on a uneconomical air route hardly anyone uses? Please don't tell me executives can't take a train: I see laptop-wielding execs on the Dutch railways all the time. And they get by without allocated seating.

    Ireland is a tiny country. There are too many airports. Knock can serve the West, Dublin the East, and Cork and Shannon the South. That's all the airports we need. We should not be wasting taxpayers' money by shuttling tiny numbers of wealthy businessmen to rural outposts like Donegal, Galway and Waterford. Not while the rest of Ireland's woeful transport infrastructure creaks from underinvestment.

    The IDA can charter its own plane if it is so embarassed that we don't have airports out in the sticks.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 61 Iób
    ✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    So the IDA wants a multinational to locate in Galway, so the exec flies into Dublin and then gets on a bus? Fugettaboutit!

    Aside from the train, there are also helicopters. The only difference being that the multinational company would have to pay for it, not the taxpayer.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 756 Zaph0d
    ✭✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    Because they aren't competing with rail and bus.
    The public has a choice of using a plane or a train or a private vehicle to carry out a journey between galway-dublin or cork-dublin. Journey time is often shorter by train when check in time and airport transfers are taken into account. The fact that air and rail tickets are priced similarly and that rail still has many more passengers than air disproves your claim.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 Victor
    ✭✭✭✭


    I'm thinking "Who do these subsidies benefit more, the regional airports or Dublin Airport?" If the subsidies weren't there, more of Ireland's international air traffic would operate from the regional airports to hubs outside Ireland.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,028 ishmael whale
    ✭✭✭


    Victor wrote:
    I'm thinking "Who do these subsidies benefit more, the regional airports or Dublin Airport?" If the subsidies weren't there, more of Ireland's international air traffic would operate from the regional airports to hubs outside Ireland.

    Possibly, but given that the purpose of the policy is presumably to enhance access to the regions would that necessarily be a bad thing? And I suppose that, intuitively, Dublin will attract a reasonable array of services in any event.

    And while, say, Sligo-London is hardly long haul flight and presumably still environmentally dodgy, at least its a journey that cannot be undertaken by rail or road.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,346 dowlingm
    ✭✭✭


    Victor, the indirect result of the PSOs (and the way PoC and Aer Arann has played them) has not been a subsidy to the regionals, it's been a subsidy to Arann. Now, the 2005 PSOs are a decrease on the previous offer and this is a slight tightening of the conditions - this is good, and eventually PSOs shouldn't exist. But that time isn't here yet. In the meantime, Arann has been using the PSO lucre to open routes from Waterford, which seems to have been used over the years but never really loved (Ryanair and Euroceltic, for example) and now a city in dire need of a boost has a service to France and London. That's lucky for us because Arann have played the Dept like a banjo (about which they are apparently unhappy) and they could just pocket the easy money instead of venturing into airports with traditionally low usage.

    There is a case to be made that routes with existing public transport over 250k pax/p.a. are illegal according to the DKM report but FIE seems to ignore that in favour of "if our members can't fly on it to throw stones at G8 meetings, we don't like it". In any case, the PSOs from Kerry and Knock should eventually grow to the point of obsoleting themselves even on the 250k air only measure. Sligo and Carrickfin will always need help, and I am puzzled as to why the hell the Republic's taxpayers are paying for Dublin-Derry unless the NI Exec are paying 50%, which I don't believe they are.

    For the poster mentioned helicopters and who is paying - should we abolish citygold just because it's for fatcats but it's attached to a train with free travel pensioners and ordinary joes? And Zaphod, why are people taking the plane if it's so inconvenient? The fact is that Iarnrod Eireann has a history to overcome, and it will need
    • the new CAF fleet
    • people to clean said train
    • allocated seating
    • no stories in the indo about people freezing in a broken down train near Ballybrophy with unservicable heating
    to bring those people back.

    For people making connections via Dublin Airport, implementation of the Dublin Rail Plan with a DART spur or integrated metro to the Interconnector will help but it's going to be very hard to beat having your bags checked through from Los Angeles to Farranfore, rather than getting off in Dublin, getting the Metro to O'Connell Street, LUAS to Heuston, Heuston to Mallow and then on to Killarney or Tralee. Try that with two 32kg bags!

    When the EU kills the Shannon stopover and more flights are direct to Dublin, this will get very obvious very quickly.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 61 Iób
    ✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    For the poster mentioned helicopters and who is paying - should we abolish citygold just because it's for fatcats but it's attached to a train with free travel pensioners and ordinary joes? .
    I think I have missed something here. Is citygold subsidised by the second-class passengers?

    Moderator, I think you'll find the references to FIE in the previous post are defamatory.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 is_that_so
    ✭✭✭✭


    Metrobest wrote:
    I'm sorry. But why should Irish taxpayers subsidise rich businessmen who want the champagne/oysters treatment on a uneconomical air route hardly anyone uses? Please don't tell me executives can't take a train: I see laptop-wielding execs on the Dutch railways all the time. And they get by without allocated seating.

    Ireland is a tiny country. There are too many airports. Knock can serve the West, Dublin the East, and Cork and Shannon the South. That's all the airports we need. We should not be wasting taxpayers' money by shuttling tiny numbers of wealthy businessmen to rural outposts like Donegal, Galway and Waterford. Not while the rest of Ireland's woeful transport infrastructure creaks from underinvestment.

    The IDA can charter its own plane if it is so embarassed that we don't have airports out in the sticks.


    Suspect you should look up a dictionary definition of "rural" before you take a scatter gun to a reasonable discussion.
    Some of these oyster-eaters are tourists. Some of them are coming home from abroad.
    And lest we forget these airports do actually provide employment.

    And embracing the spirit of your post , we shouldn't be subsidising trains either, through the CIE subvention. Terrible waste of taxpayer's money. :rolleyes:
    While I think of it couldn't see myself getting Luas to Heuston and changing at Limerick Junction either :D


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 756 Zaph0d
    ✭✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    And Zaphod, why are people taking the plane if it's so inconvenient?
    The majority don't take the plane. Despite the fact that the Dublin-Cork train costs 50% more than flying the same route, the trains carry more people (eight trains per day vs seven 60-seater flights). THE MARKET HAS SPOKEN.

    The real competitor is the car.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,346 dowlingm
    ✭✭✭


    Zaphod

    Aer Arann has *increased* frequency on Dublin-Cork since it started, in part to replace the numbers carried on the Aer Lingus 737s and 320s fewer times a day, but some of those flights are now ATR72s not 42s. The market for internal air travel has increased, despite penal levels of taxes and charges. Why?

    The point about citygold was the one TV3 makes about RTE bidding for sports events - if the subvention isn't clearly targetted then cross-subsidisation happens, in the same way I pointed out Arann can run the other services because they aren't forced to separately cost their PSO services.

    The fact that thousands of cars travel Cork-Dublin every day doesn't invalidate the rail, bus and air options, or prove any market has spoken. There is a need for air just as there is a need for rail and bus. I don't dispute that.

    I do mind it when Friends of the Irish Environment moan and whine but are rarely the kind of people who do things. The FIE and similar organisations are the kind of people who complain about fossil fuels but also object to applications for wind farms and hydroelectric reservoirs and gas production from waste biodigesters. The Friends of the Irish Environment are among the objectors to the gas facility in Co. Mayo while Ireland is forced to import gas from Europe. They object to fish farms while objecting to overfishing of marine stocks. Their webpage, which I have seen, is objection piled on objection and FAQs about how to object. I find that objectionable!

    I read in the paper this morning about a guy who runs a for-profit courier firm giving homeless and at risk kids a job, this is the kind of social activism I admire - he has not sought any grants apart from a job placement for his receptionist, all he wants is for the city to allow him tender for work!

    FIE should be creating co-operatives to make environmentally sound practices profitable rather than just popular and lobbying against CIE for not providing a proper customer experience on the rail and bus networks rather than criticising the airlines for providing a badly needed alternative.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 61 Iób
    ✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    The point about citygold was the one TV3 makes about RTE bidding for sports events - if the subvention isn't clearly targetted then cross-subsidisation happens, in the same way I pointed out Arann can run the other services because they aren't forced to separately cost their PSO services.

    So just for clarity, you don't have any information which would suggest that there is a cross-subsidy from second class to first on the Dublin-Cork route, nor to suggest that the subsidy per passenger is higher for first class than second class?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,346 dowlingm
    ✭✭✭


    What information do I need Iob? IE gets a subsidy which is NOT ringfenced. Therefore Citygold benefits from subsidised infrastructure and staff.

    Prove to me instead it is not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 756 Zaph0d
    ✭✭✭


    I said earlier that it was cheaper to fly Dublin-Cork than get the train but this is only true for Citygold which costs €111 return vs a minimum of €80 return on Aer Arann. The standard monthly rail return is €62.50

    Flying is a good option when you have just flown into Dublin Airport and need to complete your journey to Cork or when your journey happens to originate or terminate near to one of the airports.

    It's impossible to make any analysis of the market for Dublin-Cork transport so long as Irish Rail withholds basic performance data from its owners such as passenger volumes by route.

    As for filthy trains etc. Does anyone else think that IE should have to outsource its cleaning seeing as it can't manage do do it itself?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,028 ishmael whale
    ✭✭✭


    Zaph0d wrote:
    It's impossible to make any analysis of the market for Dublin-Cork transport so long as Irish Rail withholds basic performance data from its owners such as passenger volumes by route.

    Very true. A breakdown of costs and revenue by route would also be a valuable contribution to public debate.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 Victor
    ✭✭✭✭


    Irish Rail breakdown their accounts into (a) Infrastructure (b) Suburban (c) Intercity (d) other (catering, freight, etc.).

    While adding in "A breakdown of costs and revenue by route" would provide clarity and would contribute to the debate, potentially you get into the accounting situation that An Post found itself in where it employed as many accoutants as postmen.

    Separately you are then opening every semi-state up to the type of financial probing and exploitation that no private company could or would tolerate.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,107 John R
    ✭✭✭


    Victor wrote:
    Irish Rail breakdown their accounts into (a) Infrastructure (b) Suburban (c) Intercity (d) other (catering, freight, etc.).

    While adding in "A breakdown of costs and revenue by route" would provide clarity and would contribute to the debate, potentially you get into the accounting situation that An Post found itself in where it employed as many accoutants as postmen.

    Separately you are then opening every semi-state up to the type of financial probing and exploitation that no private company could or would tolerate.

    It would also be invaluable information for competing private operations to gain an unfair commercial advantage. Something that already happens with their bus services.

    In comparison to the relatively detailed info CIE provide about their operations, the DoT will not even reveal what private operators have been granted bus service licences because it is, according to them "sensitive commercial information". They however do not see any conflict with revealing proposals from the state operator to run additional services or change current operations. There have been a number of cases of private operations being licenced subsequent to CIE applying to run similar services.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 756 Zaph0d
    ✭✭✭


    State companies should have to be more transparent than private sectors companies as a tradeoff for the monopoly positions they are granted. You don't need an accountant to list how many passengers are using each of the major routes per year and what income they generate. I would expect the CEO to have these numbers (roughly) in his head. The National Spatial Strategy has some numbers they were given by CIE for 1999:

    Dublin-Cork: 824K
    Dublin-Galway: 391K
    Dublin-Limerick: 386K
    Dublin-NI: 305K
    Dublin-Kerry: 265K
    Dublin-Mayo: 263K
    Dublin-Wexford: 138K


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 61 Iób
    ✭✭


    Did they not get anything more detailed than that? I would expect an origin-destination matrix


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,346 dowlingm
    ✭✭✭


    It's funny that when the UK CAA can publish detailed breakdowns of air traffic, the Irish answer to everything is confidentiality and trade secrecy. This is all anticompetitive boll*cks of course, any public service transportation whether in private or public hands should be open to inspection, if only so integration between modes can be properly costed. Oh well.

    Outsourcing cleaning would probably bring on a rail strike.

    Also to Zaphod - a lot of companies are holding meetings at Dublin Airport Hotel so people can fly up and down same day. I know one person who is a regular Dublin-Cork for that reason. Maybe if a business hotel was attached to Heuston, or along an interconnector stop, people might train it, especially if IE marketed the total time required to use the air connection including check-in etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 756 Zaph0d
    ✭✭✭


    I&#243 wrote: »
    Did they not get anything more detailed than that? I would expect an origin-destination matrix
    They got an OD matrix showing rail passenger volumes between all counties. It is in appendix 4 of this document.

    We can also guess at the revenue from each route. eg Cork-Dublin probably earns about €20-€25 per one-way journey so income would be in the €16m-€20m range. However the numbers are 6 years old...


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 3,816 LFCFan
    Mod ✭✭✭✭


    Zaph0d wrote:
    Journey time is often shorter by train when check in time and airport transfers are taken into account.

    Difference being, that if you're getting a flight you can relax in a bar/cafe while waiting for your flight as apposed to standing in a cramped train carriage and when you get to your destination by flight you will probably be a lot less stressed!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 Calina
    ✭✭✭


    Metrobest said
    I'm sorry. But why should Irish taxpayers subsidise rich businessmen who want the champagne/oysters treatment on a uneconomical air route hardly anyone uses? Please don't tell me executives can't take a train: I see laptop-wielding execs on the Dutch railways all the time. And they get by without allocated seating.

    You can't have been on an a domestic flight in Ireland if you think the champagne and oysters treatment is available. Or do you regard the simple fact of being able to fly as champagne/oysters?

    In any case, we are subsidising an uneconomical train system and they provide CityGold or whatever it is. I think Aer Arann internally is economy class only. But I could be wrong.

    Zaph0d said
    Journey time is often shorter by train when check in time and airport transfers are taken into account.

    Until there's an intercity train station at Dublin Airport, my experience is that this is not true often enough if you're looking to travel onwards after you arrive in Dublin. The trek over to Heuston can take up to an hour if not more, you're at the mercy of the train timetable and you have to mind your luggage. And at least you're guaranteed a seat if you're on a plane.

    If you're talking general point to point within the country, well it depends on where you're starting from. If you live in Swords, then flying is faster by a nice long shot (in fact, driving is too). If you live in the city centre, chances are the train shades it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,924 BuffyBot
    ✭✭✭✭


    I think Aer Arann internally is economy class only. But I could be wrong.

    They're economy only on all flights


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 Metrobest
    ✭✭✭


    Calina wrote:
    You can't have been on an a domestic flight in Ireland if you think the champagne and oysters treatment is available. Or do you regard the simple fact of being able to fly as champagne/oysters?
    .

    I was being metaphorical. I have no objection to rich people flying here, there and everywhere. But if they want to fly a route not commercially viable - ie. most of Aer Arran's routes - then they should have to get a private jet or charter a chopper. The bottom line is, the taxpayer should not have to subsidise rich businessmen.

    Ireland is a tiny country. When all the motorways are built, the journey from Dublin to the rural Ireland will become even easier, 2.5 hours from the airport to Galway would be feasible in your car. There may be a case for connecting internal flights in a country like France, Germany or Britain, but the geography of Ireland does not justify it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 Calina
    ✭✭✭


    Metrobest said
    I have no objection to rich people flying here, there and everywhere. But if they want to fly a route not commercially viable

    But it's alright for them to use a not commercially viable train route? Or drive? I mean, the roads aren't exactly free but the vast majority of them aren't tolled.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,028 ishmael whale
    ✭✭✭


    I think the point is that the subsidised air routes cost far more to subsidise per passenger than rail, so you get to move far less people with the same money. Plus, taking the environmental argument, the non-monetary costs are lower too.

    The review of the EASP programme stated the current air subsidies to be:
    Kerry and Galway, the two original EASP routes,“• where subvention is just over €50 per
    one-way trip, €100 return;
    Donegal, Sligo and Derry, more recent additions, where subvention• is around €100 per
    one-way trip, €200 return; and
    Knock, where the• subvention is almost €280 per each-way trip, €560 return.”

    They commented
    “The Expressway element in Bus Eireann’s activities is most directly comparable to the EASP operations. Expressway operates without any current subsidy, and we understand that in 2002 carried approx. 7.5m. passengers. The Iarnród Eireann subvention reached €155m. in 2002, but cannot be broken down between intercity (where 2002 volume was 11.2m.
    passengers), suburban and freight components. Even if one-half related to intercity, which we feel is a reasonable guess, it is clear that the subsidy per passenger-trip is a small fraction of that incurred on the EASP services. For Expressway and its private sector competitors, the subsidy per passenger-trip is nil.”
    http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/4803-0.pdf

    Cutting to the chase, this suggests the typical subsidy for an intercity rail passenger looks to be about €7 a journey which is far less than is offered in the case of air. So its far from a simple case of ‘yes, air gets a subsidy but so does rail’. Air would have to demonstrate very significant benefits over road and rail to justify a subsidy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,346 dowlingm
    ✭✭✭


    the only problem with those figures is that they mix the routes that make money (greater Dublin) with those that don't (regional). For instance, Mallow-Tralee just had its signalling upgraded and there are passing loops being installed. No talk about ROI - if it weren't done the line would probably eventually close on safety grounds since the signalling is going on for a century old (really - apparently it uses oil in places). The PSO route subsidy figures count how much it costs to provide the services and the passengers carried on those services only. If IE and Expressway were forced to split out the costs of regional services the indirect subsidies would become apparent.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,028 ishmael whale
    ✭✭✭


    dowlingm wrote:
    If IE and Expressway were forced to split out the costs of regional services the indirect subsidies would become apparent.

    I agree it would be interesting to see some breakdown of costs and income per route. But, at the same time, intuitively, you'd hardly expect air to be a cheaper way of moving the same number of people as IE on any particular route. And even doubling or trebling the estimated average IE subsidy still leaves it far short of the EASP subsidies.

    There may be cross subsidisation in Expressway services, but if private operators find it feasible to provide services on many routes (including some that Expressway don't compete on) this is hardly a major factor. Intuitively it simply must be cheaper to send a busload of people to a location than the same number by air.

    So the headline conclusion of the EASP review, that the PSO air routes per passenger subsidy is far greater than alternative routes, seems well founded. I take it the environmental argument is also accepted. So, whether made by a crowd of tree huggers or not, the questioning of the logic of these subsidies seems to hold water. All we're left with the argument that air services are of higher quality than rail or road because it offers assigned seating, and the possibility of connectivity to international flights out of Dublin. But, as noted by an earlier contributor, if a regional airport offers a service to, say, the UK then international flyers can hub through those airports.

    Which seems to leave very little reason to continue the subsidy, other than to encourage regional travellers to hub through Dublin. And its not as if Dublin is short of business.


Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Advertisement