Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 2:21pm

serfboard wrote: »

Not nonsense - facts. Or how many passengers on average per train do you think are carried on the Athenry to Ennis section - the section on which over €100 milllion was spent?

50,000 I undertand 200,000 if you take the end to end European statistical method.

lot more then 8 per train. since the new fares and timetable I gather many trains are full

eastwest · 06-03-2015 2:27pm

Lenton Lane wrote: »

Ballina freight happened because there were people who challenged the consensus on railfreight and now IÉ make money out of it. All railfreight is profitable according to IÉ.

I think it's well worth the investigation into the further possibilities of railfreight.

The question is, where would additional rail freight come from, and how much of a hike in freight volumes could be realistically achieved using the most optimum scenario?
A lift of 10 to 20 percent could be handled easily on the existing network without a blink. Figures above that belong in another world altogether, and assume not only a huge shift in methodology (and type of goods handled) by the distributive sector but also a huge increase in industrialisation in the north west. Neither is realistic.
The kind of policy planning that suggests these kind of wild scenarios is in the same family as the Mccann report, but government had made it very clear that it's not falling for that one twice.

serfboard · 06-03-2015 2:30pm

BoatMad wrote: »

50,000 I undertand 200,000 if you take the end to end European statistical method.

lot more then 8 per train. since the new fares and timetable I gather many trains are full

Not answering the question. Let me re-state it for you:

serfboard wrote: »

How many passengers ... per train ... are carried on the Athenry to Ennis section

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 2:30pm

A lift of 10 to 20 percent could be handled easily on the existing network without a blink

have you a knowledge of rail operations or pertinent facts to back up that assertion

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 2:32pm

serfboard wrote: »

Not answering the question. Let me re-state it for you:

The stats I have to hand say 50,000 Ennis to Athenry , The European statistical method is end to end , which is 200,000

passagners per train is a bit of a nonsense figure , but the 8 passenger figure was from the first year of operation before IR increased frequencyand lowered fares

serfboard · 06-03-2015 2:46pm

BoatMad wrote: »

passagners per train is a bit of a nonsense figure

Yeah, it's nonsense becuase either a) you don't know it or b) it wouldn't support your argument :rolleyes:

As I've said, even WOT realise that it doesn't suppot their viewpoint either, which is why they have now switched to the freight argument.

corktina · 06-03-2015 2:51pm

BoatMad wrote: »

The stats I have to hand say 50,000 Ennis to Athenry , The European statistical method is end to end , which is 200,000

passagners per train is a bit of a nonsense figure , but the 8 passenger figure was from the first year of operation before IR increased frequencyand lowered fares

If you half the fares and double the passengers numbers does that make the line more worthwhile somehow? does it make the €100 million expenditure more worthwhile? does it cut the loss made?

How many short of the projections is the passenger figure currently? Has it reached even half of that projection?

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 3:06pm

serfboard wrote: »

Yeah, it's nonsense becuase either a) you don't know it or b) it wouldn't support your argument :rolleyes:

As I've said, even WOT realise that it doesn't suppot their viewpoint either, which is why they have now switched to the freight argument.

Again, what an advocacy group do is irrelevant , it not the decision maker

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 3:10pm

corktina wrote: »

If you half the fares and double the passengers numbers does that make the line more worthwhile somehow? does it make the €100 million expenditure more worthwhile? does it cut the loss made?

How many short of the projections is the passenger figure currently? Has it reached even half of that projection?

This isn't the place for a long winded debate about the economic versus social aspects of nationalised rail subsidies . It a complex process involving a intersection of national policy, social services and economics.

The fact is a considerable number more then the first year are travelling, thats a good point.

In france in Alps Maritime province all bus fares irrespective of distance are 1 euro, all train fares are also fixed.

Rail economics are like road economics, somewhat subjective

serfboard · 06-03-2015 3:13pm

BoatMad wrote: »

what an advocacy group do is irrelevant

I don't accept that argument at all. Are you seriously suggesting that Athenry->Ennis would have been re-built without West-On-Track?

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 3:18pm

serfboard wrote: »

I don't accept that argument at all. Are you seriously suggesting that Athenry->Ennis would have been re-built without West-On-Track?

sorry, what I meant is that ultimately an advocacy group will make any claim they like, whether its true or not is irrelevant, Its the decision makers , that take the decisions.

SO the efficacy of what WOT claim is really the issue, that as what I meant

corktina · 06-03-2015 3:27pm

BoatMad wrote: »

This isn't the place for a long winded debate about the economic versus social aspects of nationalised rail subsidies . It a complex process involving a intersection of national policy, social services and economics.

The fact is a considerable number more then the first year are travelling, thats a good point.

In france in Alps Maritime province all bus fares irrespective of distance are 1 euro, all train fares are also fixed.

Rail economics are like road economics, somewhat subjective

as with what happens in the UK, what happens in France is irrelevant. If you don't want a long-winded debate, why bring France into ?

Lenton Lane · 06-03-2015 3:31pm

corktina wrote: »

as with what happens in the UK, what happens in France is irrelevant. If you don't want a long-winded debate, why bring France into ?

Quite relevant. The only difference is that neither the UK and France have as active an anti rail movement as Ireland has.

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 3:37pm

corktina wrote: »

as with what happens in the UK, what happens in France is irrelevant. If you don't want a long-winded debate, why bring France into ?

merely to illustrate that the economics of rail investment and return on capital deployed is a very complex argument. You cannot really ask is the 100 million worth it for the WRC ,in isolation.

corktina · 06-03-2015 3:39pm

I don't know of this movement, can you provide details? a link perhaps? It would be interesting to see what they have to say

for myself, I'm anti wasting tax payers money on pie in the sky projects. I'd support re-opening a line such as Foynes where there is a traffic flow in the offing, but to open a line in the hope that some nebulous flow of freight will suddenly emerge as a result would be folly in the extreme

Oh and by the way, if you think the UK doesn't have an anti-rail movement, have a deco at the furore about
just one link...you can google the rest yourself

http://stophs2.org/

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 3:45pm

corktina wrote: »

I don't know of this movement, can you provide details? a link perhaps? It would be interesting to see what they have to say

for myself, I'm anti wasting tax payers money on pie in the sky projects. I'd support re-opening a line such as Foynes where there is a traffic flow in the offing, but to open a line in the hope that some nebulous flow of freight will suddenly emerge as a result would be folly in the extreme

Oh and by the way, if you think the UK doesn't have an anti-rail movement, have a deco at the furore about HS2!

The public in the UK are much more in favour of rail, even if certain projects got up their nose.

I think advocacy to reopen rail lines is a " good" thing. even if some public spending goes on that , its still a " good " thing.

as for pie in the sky projects, its exactly what was said about re-opening the WRC. in fact even with that , IR itself wasn't supportive and yet it happened.

some pie in the sky seem to fall to earth, it seems

serfboard · 06-03-2015 4:00pm

Lenton Lane wrote: »

Quite relevant. The only difference is that neither the UK and France have as active an anti rail movement as Ireland has.

Oh dear. Who/where is this "anti-rail movement" that you speak of - how does a person sign up and how much is the membership? :rolleyes:

Now, there may a pro-car sentiment in Ireland, and particularly in the West of Ireland. This is becuase people lobbied for, and politicians delivered, one-off housing resulting in the population being scattered to the four corners, and insufficient growth in villages and towns. (I don't have links to hand, but I seem to remember statistics showing that the populations of Sligo City and Cork City (urban) declined - even duing overall population growth).

If you are in favour of rail (as I am) then you are presumably against one-off housing all over the country necessitating travel by car? And you would also, presumably, be in favour of industrial zonings being located near railway lines, so that we don't have a situation like we have in Galway where the major centre of employment is nowhere near a railway track?

As was said before, let rail do what it is good at - moving large numbers of people over short distances (Dublin Commuter, Dart and Luas) or long distances (intercity - particularly Belfast and Cork -> Dublin), and spending money on lines where it is justified (Dart Underground will be well worth the over one billion euro cost, and, on a cheaper scale, let's double-track some existing single-lines, for example Portarlington->Athlone), instead of wasting it on lightly-trafficed lines like Athenry->Ennis and WOTs even more bonkers idea of spending money on the corridor north of Athenry.

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 4:08pm

As was said before, let rail do what it is good at - moving large numbers of people over short distances (Dublin Commuter, Dart and Luas) or long distances (intercity - particularly Belfast and Cork -> Dublin), and spending money on lines where it is justified (Dart Underground will be well worth the over one billion euro cost, and, on a cheaper scale, let's double-track some existing single-lines, for example Portarlington->Athlone), instead of wasting it on lightly-trafficed lines like Athenry->Ennis and WOTs even more bonkers idea of spending money on the corridor north of Athenry.

i think the one thing that WOT has shown is to demonstrate to IR that if you put inn a proper service timetable and pitch the fares right m, then you can get reasonable numbers to use the system.

If IR applied this elsewhere it might generate considerable more passengers on other " lightly trafficked lines"

I note in your comments that you exclude support for rail that doesn't suit you argument.
Im a rail fan and i understand it operationally. personally for example I would spend money on airport connectors , rather then Dart underground, which in reality does little for heavy rail.

Lenton Lane · 06-03-2015 4:13pm

serfboard wrote: »

Oh dear. Who/where is this "anti-rail movement" that you speak of - how does a person sign up and how much is the membership? :rolleyes:

Now, there may a pro-car sentiment in Ireland, and particularly in the West of Ireland. This is becuase people lobbied for, and politicians delivered, one-off housing resulting in the population being scattered to the four corners, and insufficient growth in villages and towns. (I don't have links to hand, but I seem to remember statistics showing that the populations of Sligo City and Cork City (urban) declined - even duing overall population growth).

If you are in favour of rail (as I am) then you are presumably against one-off housing all over the country necessitating travel by car? And you would also, presumably, be in favour of industrial zonings being located near railway lines, so that we don't have a situation like we have in Galway where the major centre of employment is nowhere near a railway track?

As was said before, let rail do what it is good at - moving large numbers of people over short distances (Dublin Commuter, Dart and Luas) or long distances (intercity - particularly Belfast and Cork -> Dublin), and spending money on lines where it is justified (Dart Underground will be well worth the over one billion euro cost, and, on a cheaper scale, let's double-track some existing single-lines, for example Portarlington->Athlone), instead of wasting it on lightly-trafficed lines like Athenry->Ennis and WOTs even more bonkers idea of spending money on the corridor north of Athenry.

Why not pop into the bathroom and check the mirror? ;-)

You see you're trying to narrow the scope of what rail should be used for by looking at it from a purely passenger perspective. Its no accident that freight is shifting to rail and we need to have adequate infrastructure in place to ensure Ireland remains competitive.

Again you also feel the need to attack WOT as do many other greenway supporting posters on the thread. WOT are as much as a pressure group as the greenway campaigners but they appear to be significantly more successful since they don't resort to personal attacks. Remember you catch more flies with a spoonful of honey than a barrelful of vinegar...

serfboard · 06-03-2015 4:36pm

Lenton Lane wrote: »

You see you're trying to narrow the scope of what rail should be used for by looking at it from a purely passenger perspective. Its no accident that freight is shifting to rail and we need to have adequate infrastructure in place to ensure Ireland remains competitive.

I accept that rail can and should be used for freight where it is justified. When you look at our heavily densely populatedf next-door neighbour (England) and see the amount of trucks on the motorways (with typically the left lane being almost exclusively trucks), you can see that they should be doing a lot more rail freighting than they do.

In Ireland, I don't see anything near the same proportion of trucks on the road, suggesting (to me) that there is nowhere near the same demand. And I don't advocate spending government money on a study to imagine "companies not yet in existence", who might use it.

Lenton Lane wrote: »

WOT are as much as a pressure group as the greenway campaigners but they appear to be significantly more successful since they don't resort to personal attacks.

1. I don't personally attack WOT. I attack their point of view.

2. How do you measure success? Yes, they were successful in getting over €100 million spent on re-opening Athenry->Ennis at a time when Bertie Ahern was throwing our money around like snuff at a wake.

However, the ongoing subvention that the line requires has come at the detriment of other services, and they have not been successful in convincing government to allocate money to any further development north of Athenry, and they have definitively lost the argument for north of Claremorris.

You might ask the question another way - why are WOT preventing an unused piece of infrastructure from being used as a Greenway, and why are they expressing no opinion about those who are encroaching on the infrastructure that they supposedly value?

BoatMad · 06-03-2015 4:41pm

serfboard wrote: »

I accept that rail can and should be used for freight where it is justified. When you look at our heavily-densely next-door neighbour (England) and see the amount of trucks on the motorways (with typically the left lane being almost exclusively trucks), you can see that they should be doing a lot more rail freighting than they do.

massive boom in rail freight in the UK. to the point where they cant even get enough Locos.

In Ireland, I don't see anything near the same proportion of trucks on the road, suggesting (to me) that there is nowhere near the same demand. And I don't advocate spending government money on a study to imagine "companies not yet in existence", who might use it.

we are a very road dependant state

1. I don't presonally attack WOT. I attack their point of view.

yes you are, they are an advocacy grip and you attack them

2. How do you measure success? Yes, they were successful in getting over €100 million spent on re-opening Athenry->Ennis at a time when Bertie Ahern was throwing our money around like snuff at a wake.

perhaps but rail economics are funny things anyway

However, the ongoing subvention that the line requires has come at the detriment of other services, and they have not been successful in convincing government to allocate money to any further development north of Athenry, and they have definitively lost the argument for north of Claremorris

.

maybe maybe not, thats not for you to decide anyway ( nor for WOT either)

You might ask the question another way - why are WOT preventing an unused piece of infrastructure from being used as a Greenway, and why are they expressing no opinion about those who are encroaching on the infrastructure that they supposedly value?

WOTY cant prevent anything, they can merely argue. They seem to be doing better job then the likes of you

eastwest · 06-03-2015 5:13pm

Lenton Lane wrote: »

Quite relevant. The only difference is that neither the UK and France have as active an anti rail movement as Ireland has.

I didn't know there was an anti-rail movement in Ireland.
I know that the greenway groups are not anti-rail; they consistently state that their aspirations for the Western Rail Trail include the protection of the route for any possible rail use in the future.
The supposedly pro-rail group that goes under the WOT banner has perversely managed to undermine the people who want to save our existing railways, by their wild projections on Ennis-Athenry; it will now be difficult for any pro-rail argument to get past any cabinet in the future, although I accept that this was hardly their intention.

eastwest · 06-03-2015 5:32pm

BoatMad wrote: »

have you a knowledge of rail operations or pertinent facts to back up that assertion

I'm just using logic, something lacking from this debate so far in many cases.
If there are seven trains coming out of Ballina every week, would one more make any difference to the network?
What I do know a bit about is the economics of the distributive trades and the logistics of the supply chain; it's all about the type of freight, and where it's going. Apart from a few bulk operators, most of the rest in the north west can't transfer to rail, it's mostly palletised multiple drop loads that would cost too much to double and treble handle if rail was used, as well as taking too long.
Imagine if the contracts currently in place with Eddie Stobart for Tesco and with other hauliers for Supervalu were to move to rail. Instead of a truck leaving the Tesco depot in Donabate with multiple drop loads for Carrick on Shannon and Sligo, it would load all the pallets into a container and bring them to a railhead in (say) Dublin. That container would then go to Sligo, be off-loaded and brought to another distributor to be stripped and loaded into smaller trucks to be delivered to the two destinations. The cost would be about double, the delivery times would be off the wall, and flexibility would be gone from the system. Perishable goods would perish.
There is a good bit of freight moving around Connaught, but only a fraction of it is suited to bulk rail loads. Generalising about some massive uplift in freight tonnage does no service to the pro-rail lobby; it is seen for what it is, another over-exaggerated version of the truth that predicted 750,000 passengers on a rural line through small villages and towns, parallel to a motorway.
The west doesn't need a white-elephant railway, it needs the N17 to be upgraded from Tuam to Collooney, but that is no excuse for letting the rail alignment fall out of public use.
Unfortunately, because there are several points of view around this issue, politicians will do what they do best -- fence sit and do nothing while the asset rots away.

Lenton Lane · 06-03-2015 5:51pm

eastwest wrote: »

I'm just using logic, something lacking from this debate so far in many cases.
If there are seven trains coming out of Ballina every week, would one more make any difference to the network?
What I do know a bit about is the economics of the distributive trades and the logistics of the supply chain; it's all about the type of freight, and where it's going. Apart from a few bulk operators, most of the rest in the north west can't transfer to rail, it's mostly palletised multiple drop loads that would cost too much to double and treble handle if rail was used, as well as taking too long.
Imagine if the contracts currently in place with Eddie Stobart for Tesco and with other hauliers for Supervalu were to move to rail. Instead of a truck leaving the Tesco depot in Donabate with multiple drop loads for Carrick on Shannon and Sligo, it would load all the pallets into a container and bring them to a railhead in (say) Dublin. That container would then go to Sligo, be off-loaded and brought to another distributor to be stripped and loaded into smaller trucks to be delivered to the two destinations. The cost would be about double, the delivery times would be off the wall, and flexibility would be gone from the system. Perishable goods would perish.
There is a good bit of freight moving around Connaught, but only a fraction of it is suited to bulk rail loads. Generalising about some massive uplift in freight tonnage does no service to the pro-rail lobby; it is seen for what it is, another over-exaggerated version of the truth that predicted 750,000 passengers on a rural line through small villages and towns, parallel to a motorway.
The west doesn't need a white-elephant railway, it needs the N17 to be upgraded from Tuam to Collooney, but that is no excuse for letting the rail alignment fall out of public use.
Unfortunately, because there are several points of view around this issue, politicians will do what they do best -- fence sit and do nothing while the asset rots away.

You are using a straw man argument to suit your own view that the railway should be lifted, logic doesn't come into it.

The fact that Irish Rail sat down in an Oireachtas committee this week with West on Track should speak volumes as to WOT's level of influence on the ongoing debate as to what to do with the WRC. No amount of insults and name calling from the greenway campaigners is changing that.

You guys need to stop name calling and start thinking of positive options for cycling infrastructure in the west. The WRC is going to remain in railway use despite all of your campaigning. It's over. Time to move on.

end of the road · 06-03-2015 6:06pm

eastwest wrote: »

Here's a paragraph from that link that says it all.

"Frank Dawson of West on Track stated that “the true potential of rail freight in Ireland is untapped” and noted that it would cost €25-30m to reinstate the railway line from Athenry to Claremorris, allowing the decongestion of the existing Inter-City route from Claremorris to Athlone."
!!!!!!!
The 'decongestion' of the Claremorris-Athlone route????
Elsewhere in the debate, they spoke of the seven goods trains a week that come out of Ballina. How congested is that?
A huge dose of reality needs to be injected into this abject nonsense, and I'm amazed that the chair of the oireachtas committee didn't run the whole lot of them out of the place, with all the fantasy stuff that was being peddled as facts. Maybe he knows something we don't, but to describe the claremorris-athlone line as congested is just so far off the wall as to be laughable.
Irish rail could double the amount of freight on that route, and nobody would notice, but what chance is there of that happening? If they get a change to freight, the best they can hope hope for would be ten or twenty percent -- one more train in tonnage terms but in reality an extra wagon on existing trains.
The freight being hauled around the north west doesn't translate easily to rail, most of it is unsuited to rail. For instance, will the collection of milk from farms be done by railway? The delivery of concrete to building sites? The distribution of food to supermarkets? The distribution of beer to pubs, or TVs to electrical shops?
Most of our freight in rural ireland is part of the supply chain or lies in the distributive sector, and can't be measured in the context of planning for rail freight infrastructure. A look at the kinds of trucks on the road says a lot -- mostly curtainsiders or tail lift rigids. Not a lot of containers.
The chair of the committee bent over backwards to pander to this nonsense this week; he shouldn't encourage them, even if they're neighbours. This committee is supposed to be part of our legislative process, not a get-together of a little gang of pub pals talking sh* te in Claremorris.

it done its job. west on track are entitled to put over their point of view and be heard. you don't agree with them, fine, but they have a right to be heard and have their point of view considered fairly

end of the road · 06-03-2015 6:17pm

westtip wrote: »

well your complaints shouldn't be directed at Greenway campaigners, it should be fired at the likes of Sligo and Mayo County councils who have done little to protect the route based on housing and commercial premises built on or near the line, or private driveways and roads tarmacced over the line

And please spare me what people must accept. Its a closed railway line that no longer has any reasonable expectation of ever re-opening due to economics and likely demand. The section north of Claremorris closed in the 1960s and that south of Claremorris in the 1970s. It's description as a "railway line" is somewhat imaginative. As it happens with regard to your comments That really is the whole point because on an evidence based criteria there is absolutely no chance of this happening which is why people want to see it put to good use as a greenway. This happens to be a view shared by the Minister of Transport and Irish Rail.

To paraphrase your tone of writing, this is the situation which the railway campaigners must accept. Hey ho on we go

irish rail are paying lip service to keep the greenway lot off their back. if its decided to return it to railway use irish rail will get on with it as they are told. its no skin off their nose what it is used for

end of the road · 06-03-2015 6:29pm

corktina wrote: »

I don't know of this movement, can you provide details? a link perhaps? It would be interesting to see what they have to say

for myself, I'm anti wasting tax payers money on pie in the sky projects. I'd support re-opening a line such as Foynes where there is a traffic flow in the offing, but to open a line in the hope that some nebulous flow of freight will suddenly emerge as a result would be folly in the extreme

Oh and by the way, if you think the UK doesn't have an anti-rail movement, have a deco at the furore about
just one link...you can google the rest yourself

http://stophs2.org/

nobody takes the stop hs2 lot seriously. everyone knows hs2 is necessary for the future and for future growth of the railway. hence it must be built

end of the road · 06-03-2015 6:37pm

eastwest wrote: »

I'm just using logic, something lacking from this debate so far in many cases.
If there are seven trains coming out of Ballina every week, would one more make any difference to the network?
What I do know a bit about is the economics of the distributive trades and the logistics of the supply chain; it's all about the type of freight, and where it's going. Apart from a few bulk operators, most of the rest in the north west can't transfer to rail, it's mostly palletised multiple drop loads that would cost too much to double and treble handle if rail was used, as well as taking too long.
Imagine if the contracts currently in place with Eddie Stobart for Tesco and with other hauliers for Supervalu were to move to rail. Instead of a truck leaving the Tesco depot in Donabate with multiple drop loads for Carrick on Shannon and Sligo, it would load all the pallets into a container and bring them to a railhead in (say) Dublin. That container would then go to Sligo, be off-loaded and brought to another distributor to be stripped and loaded into smaller trucks to be delivered to the two destinations. The cost would be about double, the delivery times would be off the wall, and flexibility would be gone from the system. Perishable goods would perish.
There is a good bit of freight moving around Connaught, but only a fraction of it is suited to bulk rail loads. Generalising about some massive uplift in freight tonnage does no service to the pro-rail lobby; it is seen for what it is, another over-exaggerated version of the truth that predicted 750,000 passengers on a rural line through small villages and towns, parallel to a motorway.
The west doesn't need a white-elephant railway, it needs the N17 to be upgraded from Tuam to Collooney, but that is no excuse for letting the rail alignment fall out of public use.
Unfortunately, because there are several points of view around this issue, politicians will do what they do best -- fence sit and do nothing while the asset rots away.

whats wrong with the n17 as it is . resurface it and remove bends where possible, that should be enough

Hungerford · 06-03-2015 7:20pm

WOT's recent statements smack of a level of desperation and self-delusion last seen within the Fuhrerbunker in 1945.

From all metrics, the Ennis-Athenry stretch has been an epic disaster, failing to generate the passenger numbers or economic development promised by WOT. Not only is it a €106 million white elephant but WOT's victory was achieved at the expense of the Waterford-Rosslare line, which enjoyed a significant speed advantage over the local road system and could have been developed into something useful by a more proactive IE management.

The fact is that freight trains from Ballina have not produced any serious congestion of the Athlone-Claremorris section. Firstly, the maximum speed deferential between passenger and freight on that section is just 20 mph, meaning that any delays should be down to ham-fisted pathing.

Even if we were to assume that there was an incredible boom in freight from Mayo, Claremorris-Athenry would be far from the most effective answer to any congestion problems. The issue could be addressed through additional double-tracking of the current single line section.

In terms of the operational flexibility argument, it would seem that the one line begging for reinstatement is Athlone to Mullingar, which would provide an alternative means for Galway, Mayo and Sligo trains to access Dublin.

eastwest · 06-03-2015 7:24pm

Lenton Lane wrote: »

You are using a straw man argument to suit your own view that the railway should be lifted, logic doesn't come into it.

The fact that Irish Rail sat down in an Oireachtas committee this week with West on Track should speak volumes as to WOT's level of influence on the ongoing debate as to what to do with the WRC. No amount of insults and name calling from the greenway campaigners is changing that.

You guys need to stop name calling and start thinking of positive options for cycling infrastructure in the west. The WRC is going to remain in railway use despite all of your campaigning. It's over. Time to move on.

Anyone who knows the situation on the ground will be aware that that little exercise at the Oireachtas committee on transport and communications had more to do with personal associations than with policy making. I watched most of it, and there was only one statement that came out of it that was relevant. The IR representative repeated almost verbatim the comments of the minister in December, i.e.. that they favoured alternative uses for all unused lines as long as they were always available for future rail use.
That comment is pretty much exactly what the pro-tourism people have always said, and it is definitely a lot closer to their viewpoint than it is to what the pro-rail people espouse. It is also pretty clear to most observers that the minister favours the greenway solution; there is no way that the IR rep was speaking outside of government policy constraints.

Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Comments