[Article] FF/PD split widens over new bus fleet

Victor · 07-08-2006 04:53PM #1

http://www.thepost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=16243-qqqx=1.asp

FF/PD split widens over new bus fleet
06 August 2006 By Niamh Connolly

Tensions have increased significantly between Fianna Fail and the PDs over plans to invest €300 million of state money in a new fleet for Dublin Bus.

Tensions have increased significantly between Fianna Fail and the PDs over plans to invest €300 million of state money in a new fleet for Dublin Bus.

A proposal by Minister for Transport Martin Cullen to fund 100 new vehicles for Dublin Bus was blocked by Tanaiste Mary Harney, who insisted that the bus market be reformed before any more public money was invested in the state company.

There were heated discussions at last week’s cabinet meeting - the last before the summer break and the start of the 2007 general election campaign in the autumn. The meeting was held in Avondale, Co Wicklow.

Cullen did not present a formal memo on his plan, but there was a strong exchange of views about the PDs’ support for further investment in Dublin Bus with a shake-up of the company’s services.

Harney’s insistence that the bus market be reformed has created ongoing problems between the government parties.

Sources believe that further tensions are now likely to emerge between the Fianna Fail/PD alliance in the autumn as the smaller party seeks to define itself in the run-up to a general election.

The PDs suffered a humiliating defeat when Fianna Fail conceded last year to the demands of the trade unions that the second terminal at Dublin Airport be operated by the state. Harney argued strongly in favour of a private terminal.

The coalition partners have been in battle over the past eight months over how to expand the bus market, with Fianna Fail accusing the PDs of taking an ‘‘ideological’’ rather than a practical approach that would gain the support of trade unions.

Because of the stand-off, there is growing concern that new bus lanes on busy routes - one in Harney’s own constituency - have no vehicles to serve the travelling public.

Harney wants 25 per cent of Dublin’s bus routes serving the city centre opened to private operators.

However, the trade unions will accept competition on only 15 per cent of the new and expanding routes in the greater Dublin area.

The PDs’ insistence on a market shake-up comes amid growing controversy in Britain over the impact of a fully deregulated bus service on a passenger service.

Five of the six major bodies with responsibility for encouraging the use of public transport in Britain have told a House of Commons inquiry that deregulation was ‘‘a failed experiment’’, which had led to higher fares, increased subsidies to commercial services, and falling standards and passengers numbers.

Chris_533976 · 07-08-2006 05:04PM

Can Cork get new buses plz, the ones we have are falling apart

lostexpectation · 07-08-2006 05:59PM

to ask a stupid question, why does harney get a say over buses?

ah poor cullen he really wants to provide the buses really he does...

Victor · 07-08-2006 06:02PM

lostexpectation wrote:

to ask a stupid question, why does harney get a say over buses? ah poor cullen he really wants to provide the buses really he does...

The government (i.e. cabinet has collective responsibility).

Red Alert · 07-08-2006 10:02PM

Why the upgrade frenzy - we need EXTRA buses! There's essentially a one-in one-out policy at the moment.

I think de-regulation has badly affected both the bus and train market in great britain.

the semi states would work well with complete top-to-toe reform, but not the type of reform Mary Harney of PD's/IBEC wants.

John R · 07-08-2006 11:27PM

Red Alert wrote:

Why the upgrade frenzy - we need EXTRA buses! There's essentially a one-in one-out policy at the moment.

It is about extra buses, the upgrade of the fleet is continuing and is funded internally.

Red Alert wrote:

I think de-regulation has badly affected both the bus and train market in great britain.

the semi states would work well with complete top-to-toe reform, but not the type of reform Mary Harney of PD's/IBEC wants.

The PDs want to break the semi-states, FF want to appease anyone who might help re-elect them.

Meanwhile one of the the fastest growing cities in Europe with the largest dependence on road based public transport has been denied much needed (and relatively cheap) improvements to the transport network for nearly 7 years.

Transport21 Fan · 08-08-2006 05:43PM

The coalition partners have been in battle over the past eight months over how to expand the bus market, with Fianna Fail accusing the PDs of taking an ‘‘ideological’’ rather than a practical approach that would gain the support of trade unions.

Reading this paragraph, you get the impression that the biggest issue that Fianna Fail have with the PDs is that the PDs actually stand for something other than winning elections and this is deemed somehow problematic by Bertie and Co.

BrianD · 08-08-2006 06:00PM

This is the type of political thinking and action (or should that be inaction) that has stymied public transport in the past.

I get the impression that certain politicains may be representing the vested interests of those who want to enter the market. Don't give Db new buses cause we'll have to have them as well.

They type of reform proposed by Harney is ridiculous and worse than Stalinist economics. We should not hand over 25% of bus routes just for the sake of it. This does nothing for the commuter. Why is Harney not calling for a planned development of public transport. All new routes identified can be put out to public tender with DB allowed to compete.

Is there any need for competition in public transport at all? If they State invested in the sector and we had an improvement in standards why have the private sector involved in the first place? The only reason there is ever calls for competition is when DB go on strike and this is a knee jerk reaction.

monument · 08-08-2006 06:43PM

Transport21 Fan wrote:

Reading this paragraph, you get the impression that the biggest issue that Fianna Fail have with the PDs is that the PDs actually stand for something other than winning elections and this is deemed somehow problematic by Bertie and Co.

Reading that paragraph, and the following makes me think the PDs are taking an "‘ideological’’ rather than a practical approach"...

The PDs’ insistence on a market shake-up comes amid growing controversy in Britain over the impact of a fully deregulated bus service on a passenger service.

Five of the six major bodies with responsibility for encouraging the use of public transport in Britain have told a House of Commons inquiry that deregulation was ‘‘a failed experiment’’, which had led to higher fares, increased subsidies to commercial services, and falling standards and passengers numbers.

dam099 · 08-08-2006 06:57PM

I'm all for privatisation where it is warranted (e.g Aer Lingus & Eircom) I'm just not sure its the best approach for public transport. However if the article is correct and

a) The unions have already conceded 15% per cent of the new and expanding routes in the greater Dublin area can be dergulated
b) The experience in the UK is that it has not worked well

then surely the sensible approach would be to try it out on the 15% the unions will agree to and see if it actually can be made to work (learning from the UK's mistakes)?

shltter · 08-08-2006 09:50PM

dam099 wrote:

I'm all for privatisation where it is warranted (e.g Aer Lingus & Eircom) I'm just not sure its the best approach for public transport. However if the article is correct and

a) The unions have already conceded 15% per cent of the new and expanding routes in the greater Dublin area can be dergulated
b) The experience in the UK is that it has not worked well

then surely the sensible approach would be to try it out on the 15% the unions will agree to and see if it actually can be made to work (learning from the UK's mistakes)?

The problem with that is that the PDs want 25% of the existing routesfor their business buddies that they know they can make a tidy profit on while the tax payer will be left to fund the unprofitable parts of the system.

They have no interest in providing public transport or building up a business they want a ready made meal ticket handed to them on a plate.

As some one has already pointed out we have the fastest growing economy and population in the EU but our capital cities bus based public transport fleet is stuck on a level that was inadequate 10 years ago never mind the hundreds of thousands of extra people working and commuting now.

The PDs have shown their true colours they care far more about putting money in the pockets of their fat cat friends and could not give a toss about the misery that trying to commute in this city causes ordinary people.

What is the point in the CIE trade unions sitting down and negoiating with the Minister for Transport if the guy can not hold up his end of the deal. This is not the first time that this has happened.

Transport21 Fan · 08-08-2006 11:45PM

BrianD wrote:

This is the type of political thinking and action (or should that be inaction) that has stymied public transport in the past.

Unlike the massive amount of CIE union industrial action which has only made Irish people cherish and remain loyal to public transport?

Public transport in Ireland became terrible for three simple reasons:

Lack of Government Support until very recently
Self-Serving CIE Unions
Unimaginative CIE managers

in that order.

BrianD wrote:

I get the impression that certain politicains may be representing the vested interests of those who want to enter the market. Don't give Db new buses cause we'll have to have them as well.

You might be correct here and I agree this is something we should be very careful of - but how is this any worse than the Labour Party working for the CIE unions which are just as much as a vested interest as IBEC?

Who is representing the public transport user in all this? Not the unions - they have shown time and time again that they consider the Irish public transport users as nothing more than a pawn to be employed as hostages during industrial unrest.

How is a person who wants to just get the bus or train to work expected to view the CIE unions as their ally against "vested interests" when the CIE unions have made an artform of demonstrating their contempt for the public transport users in this country during the last 60 years?

BrianD wrote:

They type of reform proposed by Harney is ridiculous and worse than Stalinist economics.

AFAIK she hasn't killed 40 million people yet.

BrianD wrote:

Is there any need for competition in public transport at all? If they State invested in the sector and we had an improvement in standards why have the private sector involved in the first place? The only reason there is ever calls for competition is when DB go on strike and this is a knee jerk reaction.

The question at the top of this paragraph was answered by your statement at the bottom. There would be no push for privatisation of public transport in this county if the CIE unions behaved like public servants which is what they employed to do.

If the CIE unions and management provided quality public transport I would defend them and be against any calls for privatisaiton. But CIE unions have a long and terrible history of being a self-serving joke and CIE management a shower of muppets. They only have themselves to blame for the "P" word being constantly branded about.

It's as simple as that.

BrianD · 09-08-2006 12:20AM

Yes but whose interest do the private operators care about - their passengers or shareholders? Like their public counterparts they have other interests that they are serving. They also operate as monopolies that have no competition on the routes they will operate so there is no onus to offer higher standards or offerings. Nor are they immune to union activity. They'll also be getting a generous subsidy from the State.

Stating that 25% of routes should be opened up to private operators is simply ridiculous especially when the PD's and current government have yet to put an integrated transport plan into operation into place that will take us into the future. Of course they won't do that. Two reasons - "breaking the eggs" will cause to much consternation for the PD's business buddies in the short term while FF are more concerned about what the voters might think. Privatisation is not the cure to a problem that has not been diagnosed properly.

Private transport in this country in this country is nothing to write home about. In my view its pretty lazy and shoddy. The RPA are CIE in a different guise - same attitudes and pretty darn incompetent and just like the public sector are highly reliant on overpaid and underqualified consultants to tell them pretty much what they knew already. The private operators of the Luas are obviously so proud of their service that they are unable to put their name on anything to do with the service.

To be frank, I agree with a lot of what you saw about the CIE unions and their negative influence. However, it think that this is just a symptom of the lack of Government action and investment in public transport. I notice that Harney is calling for the bus market to be reformed and not public transport to be improved for the people of Dublin. Perhaps her thinking is not far from the thinking of CIE unions as you see it.

monument · 09-08-2006 12:25AM

That what you and the PDs are suggesting is an ideology based approach that the evidence suggests was a “failed experiment” in the UK.

You are trying to claim that add another "vested interest" is going to solve everything without backing it up, while the UK experience is that it makes things worse.

Transport21 Fan · 09-08-2006 01:02AM

when it comes to either full union mandated semi-state, versus full privatisation run by fat cats in public transport I say a pox on both their houses.

A well regulated mix of both works best - eg; Switzerland, Austria, Scandinavia etc...

Either way the current arrangment is not working. CIE is Dev-era leftover long passed its sell-by date and increased investment appears to only make it more of a protecton racket for the NBRU. This simply has to stop once and for all. The passengers are being screwed - not the CIE unions with their fake victim complexes and complete disregard for the people who pay their wages via taxation and the fare box. They have no right to assuming any moral high ground when it comes to this debate.

I think the general move towards more private operators and the growing profile of the RPA in terms of rail transport provision is overall a good idea. The less power CIE has the better it is for public transport in Ireland.

John R · 09-08-2006 01:34AM

A discussion on which method is best is fine, the big problem here is that ACTION is needed now and the spat between bertie and harney is stopping any progress.

The simple facts are that there needs to be a big expansion in the number of buses on the streets ASAP and that is only going to be achieved by the increase of the DB fleet. They are the only company that has the resources to accomadate the aquisition, storage, maintenance and operation of 200 extra buses within a short timeframe.

The PDs can bleat on about private operations but in the time they have been in power what has been done about laying the groundwork for workable private operations? Nothing.

Many of the people who IMO are behind the demands for privatisation were hoping for a deregulation situation where the state operation would be artificially carved up into bits they could buy at knockdown prices as happened in the UK.

For a number of years the DoT have been promoting a bizarre mix of the status quo in the public sector along with trying to encourage private operators to grab new routes up in a free-for-all giveaway.

That has been a failure, apart from a few exceptions it has not been an attractive option for small-medium sized operators, profitable routes in city transport are few and many of the attempts have lost considerable amounts of money. The big companies are not interested in small one-off routes either.

John R · 09-08-2006 01:43AM

Transport21 Fan wrote:

when it comes to either full union mandated semi-state, versus full privatisation run by fat cats in public transport I say a pox on both their houses.

A well regulated mix of both works best - eg; Switzerland, Austria, Scandinavia etc...

If by that you mean tightly controlled franchise operations then that system has one major downside; it is very expensive. Far more so than the current system which despite the evil unions is extremely frugally managed.

None of the big operators would run the bus service on the current Dublin Bus budget, not without big fare increases and service cuts, there is no profit margin in it and those companies demand big margins.

Transport21 Fan · 09-08-2006 02:02AM

Can anyone explain to me how adding 200 extra buses to the gridlock in Dublin will improve public transport?

What use is this without proper bus lanes and doing something like banning single occupant cars at rush hour. It's just 200 extra buses stuck in traffic.

Transport21 Fan · 09-08-2006 02:10AM

John R wrote:

None of the big operators would run the bus service on the current Dublin Bus budget, not without big fare increases and service cuts, there is no profit margin in it and those companies demand big margins.

If the service vastly improved I suspect that most people would gladly pay higher bus and train fares.

Victor · 09-08-2006 02:12AM

Certain routes are over subscribed and adding capacity and frequency just might improve both that and attract car users and use road space free up by port-bound HGVs. Fewer cars, less congestion.

But yes, removing other restrictions is important.

John R · 09-08-2006 02:39AM

Transport21 Fan wrote:

Can anyone explain to me how adding 200 extra buses to the gridlock in Dublin will improve public transport?

What use is this without proper bus lanes and doing something like banning single occupant cars at rush hour. It's just 200 extra buses stuck in traffic.

Both are necessary but the idea that the additional buses are unnecessary is bunk, as is the daft inference that 200 buses is going to worsen the gridlock.

The fact is that there are a number of bus lanes now with no services on them. Particularly on orbital roads. Fingal CC are turning the N32 lane back to a hard shoulder as there has been no bus service on it for over a year and motorists are always complaing to Joe Duffy et al about it.

Some DunLaoghaire councillors have said that they won't allow the Rock Road bus lane be used until there is additional buses put on the routes serving it. TBH it is an extremely ignorant vote-whoring stance as the bus routes on that corridor (despite the proximity to DART) are extremely busy and the bus lanes once finished will cut through the slowest part of the corridor.

There is also the issue of the new developments around the city which are in general poorly served. In many cases the bus services are only introduced months or years after the developments. By then people are already car reliant and will not give up the motors easily. There should be capacity tom put in frequent services as the developments are being built so that people moving in already have a proper service to use from the start.

I wholehartedly agree that hardline anti-car commuting measures are necessary but the basics of a good bus service needs to be there as well, that means enough buses on enough high-frequency routes to serve most of the population of the city.

There is also the current bus users to consider, the fleet is being spread more thinly than ever, outside of the major routes the service frequency to many areas is dropping, there are not enough buses to go around and priority is being given to the well used routes.

This creates a knock-on effect on the minor routes, as frequency drops the route becomes less attractive and so on.

westtip · 09-08-2006 11:03AM

Transport21 Fan wrote:

"Ireland's domestic service economy remains uncompetitive and its public sector inefficient. That means relatively high costs for energy, transportation and business services, and higher living costs for workers...much of the blame lies with public-sector unions that have successfully won the right to have their salaries "benchmarked" to the private sector, without a similar benchmarking for productivity, job security, vacations or fringe benefits. " - The Washington Post, July 2006 .

At long last someone says it as it is. Good on you for finding this quote from the WP, glad to see some observers are finally copping on - instead of this back clapping crap we have in our own papers.

hewlett · 09-08-2006 11:45AM

Victor wrote:

Tensions have increased significantly between Fianna Fail and the PDs over plans to invest €300 million of state money in a new fleet for Dublin Bus.

A proposal by Minister for Transport Martin Cullen to fund 100 new vehicles for Dublin Bus was blocked by Tanaiste Mary Harney, who insisted that the bus market be reformed before any more public money was invested in the state company.

Just as a side issue - roughly how much does a bus cost?

€300 million seems a lot of money for 100 extra buses! Or am I missing something from the original article?

MarkoP11 · 09-08-2006 11:49AM

AV/AX class double decker is about 150,000 GBP

hewlett · 09-08-2006 11:58AM

MarkoP11 wrote:

AV/AX class double decker is about 150,000 GBP

150,000 GBP is roughly 220,000 euro

This would give a total of around €22 million rather than €300 million for 100 of them.

I realise that there is probably more to it than just the base cost of a bus, but that is quite a significant difference.

MarkoP11 · 09-08-2006 12:11PM

You would buy a 100 30m Luas trams for that kind of money, or about 170 DART or railcar coaches, the numbers don't add up

The Transport 21 budget for Dublin Bus is €529 million

There is some creative accounting here

Transport21 Fan · 09-08-2006 12:26PM

John R wrote:

Both are necessary but the idea that the additional buses are unnecessary is bunk, as is the daft inference that 200 buses is going to worsen the gridlock.

It would of been daft if I had of stated this, which I didn't. I asked a question, not issued a statement.

Transport21 Fan · 09-08-2006 12:38PM

hewlett wrote:

Just as a side issue - roughly how much does a bus cost?

€300 million seems a lot of money for 100 extra buses! Or am I missing something from the original article?

100 extra drivers?

D'Peoples Voice · 09-08-2006 12:58PM

dam099 wrote:

The experience in the UK is that it has not worked well

that statement should be banned on boards.ie! It simply is not true!
Ask yourself which is Dublin more like Rural Devon or London.
London you might say, well I have news for you, privatization in London has been an astounding success while privatization in Devon has been a disaster.
Why someone like Niamh connolly is employed in a newspaper like the Indo when clearly she can't do 5mins research.

'What rubs salt into the wound for MPs in the regions is that while my constituents have to make do with a deregulated free-for-all, London's regulated buses are enjoying record public investment and massive growth in ridership. If regulation is good enough for London it should be good enough for cities like Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham.'

The release of the survey follows the publication last week of new DfT figures for bus patronage which showed bus use in London increased by 5.3% last year while in PTE areas it declined by 2.8%. This is consistent with longer term trends [3]

http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/Web/corporate/pages.nsf/Links/FB44CAB8E3FDCF7080256A380057560C/$file/New+poll+shows+regional+MPs+want+London.doc
We should nearly have a sticky of this link! (page 2 especially)
http://www.pteg.net/NR/rdonlyres/BBE4D6D8-5732-4B1E-92DD-B8C52C2D77D1/0/20051219Busbriefing.pdf

Just to repeat again for those who refuse to accept that the London market and rural England are the same, they are not! Hence if Dublin is to be privatized, guess what, the proposals are based on the London model not the rural England model, hence we can expect higher patronage on our buses.

Of course for FF TDs this goes way over their heads!

BrianD · 09-08-2006 12:58PM

Transport21 Fan wrote:

Can anyone explain to me how adding 200 extra buses to the gridlock in Dublin will improve public transport?

What use is this without proper bus lanes and doing something like banning single occupant cars at rush hour. It's just 200 extra buses stuck in traffic.

Certainly a lot more for the commuter than 25% of bus routes being privatised. However, their use will not be maximised without the introduction of an integrated transport master plan.

In the immeditate term, I would guess that the 200 buses would replace older buses or could be used to improve frequency on existing bus corridors. Certainly their arrival would be welcome.

lostexpectation · 09-08-2006 04:14PM

westtip wrote:

At long last someone says it as it is. Good on you for finding this quote from the WP, glad to see some observers are finally copping on - instead of this back clapping crap we have in our own papers.

sorry who wrote that I don't see it in t21 ramblings, (yes I sneeked a peek)

[Article] FF/PD split widens over new bus fleet

Comments