nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Irish Rail

sebcity

I heard on the radio yesterday that Irish Rail are losing 500k a week.

The tickets are increasing in price yearly - I'd imagine that covers increasing diesel costs, salaries etc.... so how are they losing half a million a week?! Has the amount of commuters fallen?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Jamie2k9

Another urban myth.

Myth maybe but pension costs are a major part of the high employee costs. IE staff got away with a lot compared to some sectors of the public service.

As for privatization don't see it myself as most rail services make losses even with state funding.

n97 mini

Copyerselveson wrote: »

The Motorway system in places like the Waterford Motorway, the M3 and the Limerick tunnels are sucking up masses of government subsidies

I thought motorists collectively funded all roads (and more) via motor tax.

There is an argument that rail shouldn't be subsidised by ordinary taxpayers, many of whom don't use it at all.

Personally I would close all lines that are hopelessly losing money once a best effort to make them profitable has been tried and failed.

Judgement Day

n97 mini wrote: »

I thought motorists collectively funded all roads (and more) via motor tax.

There is an argument that rail shouldn't be subsidised by ordinary taxpayers, many of whom don't use it at all.

Personally I would close all lines that are hopelessly losing money once a best effort to make them profitable has been tried and failed.

The entire rail system so?

Copyerselveson

n97 mini wrote: »

I thought motorists collectively funded all roads (and more) via motor tax.

There is an argument that rail shouldn't be subsidised by ordinary taxpayers, many of whom don't use it at all.

Personally I would close all lines that are hopelessly losing money once a best effort to make them profitable has been tried and failed.

Note that funds raised by motor tax don't necessarily go back directly to roads.

And one way of remedying the lack of availability of rail transport to all taxpayers is to extend the rail network to be accessible to all taxpayers.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

I thought motorists collectively funded all roads (and more) via motor tax.

There is an argument that rail shouldn't be subsidised by ordinary taxpayers, many of whom don't use it at all.

Personally I would close all lines that are hopelessly losing money once a best effort to make them profitable has been tried and failed.

because closing things that didn't make a proffit worked so well last time, oh wait, so the lot of the network then, i suppose we should close anything that doesn't make a proffit? so if my line goes why should my taxes go toards for example dart underground? well my line will be closed probably so i won't be able to use it. oh wait i don't get a choice, as heres the problem, one signs up to paying for things they don't use as they are legally obliged to pay tax.

Jamie2k9

Judgement Day wrote: »

The entire rail system so?

Now don't manipulate the point being made.

cgcsb

n97 mini wrote: »

I thought motorists collectively funded all roads (and more) via motor tax.

There is an argument that rail shouldn't be subsidised by ordinary taxpayers, many of whom don't use it at all.

Personally I would close all lines that are hopelessly losing money once a best effort to make them profitable has been tried and failed.

VRT certainly does not cover the roads bill. €8bn of public money has been spent on building motorways alone in the past decade. The bill for all new roads, plus maintenance plus subsidising the toll companies means that roads are running a massive deficit.

IÉ's loss was about €14m in 2011, the VAT paid to the state on each ticket would more than cover the shortfall. Ergo we should close the M3, M9 and M18 schemes.

Emme

I think the losses are partly due to the demographic travelling by rail. Do Irish Rail get subsidised for the passengers who travel free or at significantly reduced cost? There is a small core of workers who commute by train but there is a significant number of people who don't pay much. Pensioners take full advantage of the train and fair play to them, they have made their contribution. An awful lot of people in Ireland aren't making a contribution and they still travel by train in droves. Every worker travelling on the train seems to be subsidising 3 people who don't pay for their tickets.

Neon_Lights

Emme wrote: »

I think the losses are partly due to the demographic travelling by rail. Do Irish Rail get subsidised for the passengers who travel free or at significantly reduced cost? There is a small core of workers who commute by train but there is a significant number of people who don't pay much. Pensioners take full advantage of the train and fair play to them, they have made their contribution. An awful lot of people in Ireland aren't making a contribution and they still travel by train in droves. Every worker travelling on the train seems to be subsidising 3 people who don't pay for their tickets.

They get department of social welfare subsidies from ireland and cross border social welfare ni where applicable... and this is only for journeys made with tickets.

Judgement Day

Emme wrote: »

I think the losses are partly due to the demographic travelling by rail. Do Irish Rail get subsidised for the passengers who travel free or at significantly reduced cost? There is a small core of workers who commute by train but there is a significant number of people who don't pay much. Pensioners take full advantage of the train and fair play to them, they have made their contribution. An awful lot of people in Ireland aren't making a contribution and they still travel by train in droves. Every worker travelling on the train seems to be subsidising 3 people who don't pay for their tickets.

You're all over the place with your post. OAPs and some others have free travel but this has little to do with the shambolic state of affairs that exist within the company. The old red herring of the free travel scheme is routinely trotted out by those with their own petty agendas and little knowledge of CIE/IE. The Railways have been a political football since nationalisation in 1950 and the present set-up is not reformable. Incidentally, I don't know where you get your anecdotal figure of one worker (paying passenger) for every three people travelling free.....

jackofalltrades

end of the road wrote: »

what routes would they be. really the unviable routes closed in the 60s, closing any more will solve nothing, like it solved nothing then. tell us all how more efficient irish rail could be on the current subsidy?

Closing low volume routes and not spending money on opening new ones would be a start.

no it shouldn't, management pay should, the subsidy is to pay for the service, so it should be payed.

Paying a subsidy regardless of performance just encourages under-performance.

so if my line goes why should my taxes go towards for example dart underground?

If you live outside of Dublin none of your taxes ever go towards paying for services in Dublin.
Dublin is a net contributor of about €1 billion to the rest of the counties of Ireland every year.

Copyerselveson wrote:

The Motorway system in places like the Waterford Motorway, the M3 and the Limerick tunnels are sucking up masses of government subsidies and the railway is losing out

How much is the subsidy? And how does it compare to the subsidy the railways get each year.

end of the road

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Closing low volume routes

tried and failed. again, what routes, the majority of the network could be classed as "under performing"

jackofalltrades wrote: »

not spending money on opening new ones would be a start.

so you don't want dart underground then? thats okay, personally i do as i would use it, unless of course my rail line is ever closed meaning i won't be able to.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Paying a subsidy regardless of performance just encourages under-performance.

no it doesn't, management manage the company, if it is under performing, book stops with them. hence matching their pay to their performance is a brilliant idea.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

If you live outside of Dublin none of your taxes ever go towards paying for services in Dublin.

yes it does. the money goes around the system.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Dublin is a net contributor of about €1 billion to the rest of the counties of Ireland every year.

and? it contributes, like the rest of the country contributes. the money goes around. so i'm entitled to the services i get like you. and for the most part i get them all though like everywhere they could do better.

jackofalltrades

cgcsb wrote: »

VRT certainly does not cover the roads bill. €8bn of public money has been spent on building motorways alone in the past decade. The bill for all new roads, plus maintenance plus subsidising the toll companies means that roads are running a massive deficit.

According to this the tax tax from motorists alone for last year was €4.3bn.
Motorists easily pay for their road infrastructure.

IÉ's loss was about €14m in 2011, the VAT paid to the state on each ticket would more than cover the shortfall. Ergo we should close the M3, M9 and M18 schemes.

After a state contribution of €142 million.
The motorways got a lot less than that.
That and if the government really wanted to, they could probably re-negotiate the contract to stop subsidy payments but allow the toll companies to toll the roads for longer.

jackofalltrades

end of the road wrote: »

tried and failed. again, what routes, the majority of the network could be classed as "under performing"

One or all of the following:

Ballybrophy to Limerick
Waterford to Limerick
Limerick to Galway

Replace the service with a bus instead.

so you don't want dart underground then? thats okay, personally i do as i would use it, unless of course my rail line is ever closed meaning i won't be able to.

Let me clarify that, I was referring to projects like the WRC with that comment.

and? it contributes, like the rest of the country contributes. the money goes around. so i'm entitled to the services i get like you. and for the most part i get them all though like everywhere they could do better.

When you net it out, Dublin is a massive contributor.
So if you live outside of Dublin your taxes aren't going towards providing our infrastructure.

Judgement Day

jackofalltrades wrote: »

One or all of the following:

Ballybrophy to Limerick
Waterford to Limerick
Limerick to Galway

Replace the service with a bus instead.
Let me clarify that, I was referring to projects like the WRC with that comment.

When you net it out, Dublin is a massive contributor.
So if you live outside of Dublin your taxes aren't going towards providing our infrastructure.

And when these closure fail/worsen the situation at Irish Rail, where then the axe...

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein.

end of the road

jackofalltrades wrote: »

One or all of the following:

Ballybrophy to Limerick
Waterford to Limerick
Limerick to Galway

Ballybrophy to Limerick is certainly a goner, limerick waterford shouldn't be touched, it has decent sized towns on it clonmell especially. limerick galway isn't going anywhere all though ennis athenry (the reopened section) wouldn't be missed i suppose if it did have to go, ennis limerick seems to have a good amount of traffic

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Replace the service with a bus instead.

or just tell the users "buy a car" once you replace a rail service with a bus thats what seems to happen anyway so it would speed up the process.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Let me clarify that, I was referring to projects like the WRC with that comment.

fair enough, but its not as if such lines are going to be reopened now. as a concept, limerick to galway is viable, however on its current route it isn't going to work. remember it was only the ennis athenry section that was reopened, limerick ennis and galway athenry had decent traffic way before ennis athenry was ever considered for reopening

Hilly Bill

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Myth maybe but pension costs are a major part of the high employee costs. IE staff got away with a lot compared to some sectors of the public service.

As for privatization don't see it myself as most rail services make losses even with state funding.

How do you work that one out?

Hilly Bill

Emme wrote: »

I think the losses are partly due to the demographic travelling by rail. Do Irish Rail get subsidised for the passengers who travel free or at significantly reduced cost? There is a small core of workers who commute by train but there is a significant number of people who don't pay much. Pensioners take full advantage of the train and fair play to them, they have made their contribution. An awful lot of people in Ireland aren't making a contribution and they still travel by train in droves. Every worker travelling on the train seems to be subsidising 3 people who don't pay for their tickets.

The amount travelling for free is ridiculous . If IR got paid for every journey a pass holder makes then they would nearly be making a profit. The pass holders seem to be in a majority of those travelling.

Neon_Lights

Hilly Bill wrote: »

The amount travelling for free is ridiculous . If IR got paid for every journey a pass holder makes then they would nearly be making a profit. The pass holders seem to be in a majority of those travelling.

As i said they do ... from the deparment of social welfare ... here and from northern ireland... they still make a loss...

There are only three profitable rail systems in the world vancouver and tokyo and osaka.. all others make losses.

What i would say is that stations in ireland are heavily uncommercialised in comparison to germany

mickydoomsux

Hilly Bill wrote: »

The amount travelling for free is ridiculous . If IR got paid for every journey a pass holder makes then they would nearly be making a profit. The pass holders seem to be in a majority of those travelling.

In the 4 stations my manager covers they make up well over 60% of the passengers.

The blank free travel tickets come in boxes of 2000 as opposed to the 1000 boxes for everything else.

And paying customers are standing on nearly every train. Nearly a quarter of the population of the country can travel for nothing.

The price of an annual Taxsaver ticket is going up in in a magnitude of hundreds. Free travel still costs the same as it ever did.

But keep cutting my wages, subvention, non-payroll costs, staffing levels and anything that isn't the sacred All-Island free travel scheme.

Destroy public transport by punishing the paying customer to keep it free and then wonder why no one who has to pay might use it. A uniquely Irish solution, take care of the non-contributor to the detriment of the fool who has to pay.

SpaceTime

Copyerselveson wrote: »

Privatisation isn't the cure-all that some may think it is. Here in England the levels of government subsidy are far higher than in the supposedly bad old days of British Rail.

BR's main problem was the same problem IÉ now faces; inadequate subsidy resulting in increasingly inferior services and poor infrastructure.

The Irish state is no stranger to subsidising other forms of transport. The Motorway system in places like the Waterford Motorway, the M3 and the Limerick tunnels are sucking up masses of government subsidies and the railway is losing out. In many respects the problems now faced by IÉ are the drying of of the government subvention - but out of that subvention they are expected to maintain services and the infrastructure.

Money can be found to subsidise Roadstone as it always has been found but somehow the Keynesian attitudes to the Motorway network suddenly become Thatcherite when the railway is looking for money.

If we are to privatise the railways then money must be spent on bringing the rail infrastructure up to scratch and removing bottlenecks.

Essential projects like the Dublin Airport extension, Dart Underground and the Pace-Navan link need to be built but we also need to pave the way for higher speed operation and provision of longer passing loops where needed and the elimination of Temporary Speed Restrictions that choke the railway. Railway services need to run when passengers require them and if that means early starts and significantly later finishes of timetables then so be it. Recruit and train more staff and pay them a living wage too.

NI Railways runs at a profit, and while Stormont could spend more on improving the NI Railways network we could do well to follow the NI example where the railway is in profit, has cash reserves and is still owned by the people.

For too long the railway has been a political football and subsidies to certain favoured road building companies needs to stop.

I actually think realistically that the motorway network is genuinely of more benefit. I'm not saying that's a good thing, it's down to very low density population spread and very bad planning.

Ireland's utterly car dependent more so than most of Europe (other than maybe some bits of the Nordic countries).

For rail to be profitable you need hubs and we don't really have those. So, in most cases you'd have to drive to the railway to use it so, it becomes kind of pointless and you might as well just drive the whole way.

RHJ

This post has been deleted.

end of the road

RHJ wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

why would we want driverless trains, something like a train needs a human behind the controls at all times. simply, unless its a small metro system or something, its not going to happen, at least in our lifetimes

Jamie2k9

The Motorway system in places like the Waterford Motorway, the M3 and the Limerick tunnels are sucking up masses of government subsidies

If you want to get very particular then all motorways which are not within 50 miles of the M50 should be closed as they all carry the same levels of traffic once the major midlands towns are passed the standard numbers traveling are between 7-10k per day.

How do you work that one out?

The average cost is high and now I know there is a big gap between top and bottom however when you consider the wider wage scale, you have to ask how its so high.

As for the pass holders, I estimate (think its more) that IE are losing at least 1,000 for every Intercity service running on the network daily and they are only receive a third of the DSP funding they should be.

Hilly Bill

What do you think the pension is worth to the average staff member considering they contribute to it themselves? Appointed staff that is. As it stand its worth very little.

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

because closing things that didn't make a proffit worked so well last time, oh wait, so the lot of the network then, i suppose we should close anything that doesn't make a proffit?

I think people get a bit caught up with the romanticism of railways and the by-gone era and all that, but the reality is Ireland has such low population density that many rail lines simply would never work. The low density is compounded by lax planning laws which allow around 50% of all new builds to be one-offs, i.e. completely reliant on cars to get around.

end of the road wrote: »

so if my line goes why should my taxes go toards for example dart underground?

The DU, which doesn't exist, would very likely be profitable if it did exist.

end of the road wrote: »

as heres the problem, one signs up to paying for things they don't use as they are legally obliged to pay tax.

I think you'd agree it'd be fairer if your taxes went on things you actually used?

n97 mini

jackofalltrades wrote: »

One or all of the following:

Ballybrophy to Limerick
Waterford to Limerick
Limerick to Galway

Without seeing the books, at a guess I'd add Longford-Sligo, Gorey-Rosslare, Roscommon-Westport (although freight might be tipping the balance here).

EDIT: Patronage levels here: http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Rail-Census-2012.pdf

Copyerselveson

n97 mini wrote: »

Without seeing the books, at a guess I'd add Longford-Sligo, Gorey-Rosslare, Roscommon-Westport (although freight might be tipping the balance here).

EDIT: Patronage levels here: http://www.nationaltransport.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Rail-Census-2012.pdf

Well if it's a scorched earth policy you want regarding the railways then that lot would be a good place to start. However thinking long term and thinking in ways we could shift development away from Dublin and the east coast and more to the west you would simply copper fasten the focus of the state on Dublin and leave the western half of the country as a car dependent under developed hinterland.

As someone from the relatively isolated north west of the country I would be appalled if that scenario you are promoting comes to pass.

Politically it would be dynamite. That level of rail closures would probably push the electorate in the west further into the arms of Sinn Fein etc. too.

may06

n97 mini wrote: »

Without seeing the books, at a guess I'd add Longford-Sligo

Without seeing the books you can justify this closure??? Why?

n97 mini

may06 wrote: »

Without seeing the books you can justify this closure??? Why?

I'm guessing they don't look good as patronage levels are very low at all stations after Longford (except Sligo, but it's at the end of the line). Leixlip Louisa Bridge Station gets about the same level of patronage as all stations from Dromod to Sligo combined.