Western Rail Corridor

Schuhart

Gruffalo wrote: »

Gee, thanks for all that hot air.

Thanks for implicitly recognising that you can’t refute my points.

Gruffalo wrote: »

Has more investment been spent in Dublin than in the rest of the country. Yes, therefore it is and has been the priority.

Well, efforts to prevent Dublin’s population growth have certainly failed and private sector investment has tended to concentrate there. But I thought the issue was more about you insisting that Government saw Dublin as a priority. I don’t see any evidence for saying they have concentrated in Dublin. For the sake of argument, we spend twice as much on subsidising rural school transport services as we do on Bus Atha Cliath. In fact, we probably spend more on rural school transport services than we do subsidising all public transport services in Dublin.

So, no, I don’t really think you’ve got the point. Investment in Dublin has not been a priority of Government. That, can I remind you, is what you claimed. I'm afraid you are simply wrong, there's no polite way around it.

Gruffalo wrote: »

Should it be the priority? Yes it is the economic heartland of our country.

Well, I’m not sure what ‘priority’ means here. I don’t think that Dublin has any intrinsically greater or lesser claim on resources than any other region. As I understand it, the project in T21 with the greatest social return from the required investment is the development of Cork suburban services. So that, in my opinion, is the priority, to be followed by whatever projects produce the next greatest social return. This means, incidently, that the WRC probably wouldn’t even feature on the list.

Gruffalo wrote: »

Now, to what my point has consistently been. A large proportion of the WRC funding has been commited on the Ennis - Athenry line. If you were to cut the WRC what would you do with the remainder?

Hopefully this is clear from what I just said.

Gruffalo wrote: »

You assume that WRC will be a complete failure. The following list all support it and you in your assumed wisdom have not provided one shred of evidence to prove them wrong.

Well, I think the problem is more that you haven’t been following this thread for too long. Don’t worry, I’ll make it easy for you so you don’t need to go back over all 100+ pages. Incidently, we’re well aware of the political support for the WRC and the scope of the proposal that those petitioners signed up to.

But on the key point, I’ve already collated the main points as to why the WRC is a bad idea a few pages back in this post. There simply is no case for it.

Let me also say, at this stage our discussion is academic. This service is (incredible as it seems) the one element of T21 that we can be absolutely certain will happen. There will be trains running up and down to Athenry in the not too distant future.

invincibleirish

Gruffalo wrote: »

"Add to this the CSO’s own population projections which indicate that the West will be the second fastest growing region increasing its population by 35% to 2021."

Taken from http://www.wdc.ie/documents/WesternRailCorridorPromotingRegionalBalance13thApri_000.pdf

But I am sure you think you know better.

The following people all support the WRC and believe it will be of benefit why do you think you know better?

The WRC campaign is supported by over 100,000 citizens' signatures; 12 Western County and City Development Boards; all west coast local authorities; 3 regional authorities; The Council for the West; Shannon Development; the Western Development Commission; The Border Midlands and West Regional Assembly; National University of Ireland Galway, 3,377 Community and Voluntary organizations, members of the Community and Voluntary Forum along the West coast; all the Dáil represented political parties; all west coast Chambers of Commerce; ICTU in the West; IFA; IDA; Ireland West Tourism, Local Development Agencies.

You linked to a press release from the WDC, i want proper stats please.

And i do know better then some of the quangos you cite. They have very tenous grasps on ideas of planning and infrastructure development. But that besides the point, all these western groups are hardly going to be opposed to the WRC and sign a petiition now are they?


I though the school half term was last week?

Gruffalo

invincibleirish wrote: »

You linked to a press release from the WDC, i want proper stats please.

And i do know better then some of the quangos you cite.

If you have a problem with the manner in which the CSO has been quoted then please feel free to take that up with them.

Once again you have no justification for your silly assertion that you know better than them.

Gruffalo

MYOB wrote: »

Could you please stop posting the same information over and over again? Its the worst debating tactic known to man.

A 35% increase to a tiny base is a tiny total. The WRC does not make any economic sense now - not even Phase 1 - and even with a 35% growth will only be justifiable under grounds of regional investment. Are you utterly incapable of accepting this?

Are you utterly incapable of backing anything you say up with some evidence. I have given you a list of the people who support the WRC and believe it will be beneficial. These people (apart from perhaps the 100,000 citizens) are more qualified, than you on this issue.

Why do you think you know better?

IIMII

I hate this thread

L1011

Gruffalo wrote: »

Are you utterly incapable of backing anything you say up with some evidence. I have given you a list of the people who support the WRC and believe it will be beneficial. These people (apart from perhaps the 100,000 citizens) are more qualified, than you on this issue.

Why do you think you know better?

Because I'm not in the West of Ireland with a complex over Dublin getting infrastructure. All of them, ooh, ARE.

You're utterly incapable of seeing the facts of this. Stage 3 of the WRC was declared as never going to be financial viable; ever. Stage 1 went ahead on faulty reasoning and said faulty reasoning even suggested Stage 2 wasn't a runner financially.

Its draining money we do not have to absolutely no end - the opened railway will be a low frequency, low capacity, low speed system linking areas that are going to be linked by the M17 and M18 motorways by the end of T21 anyway - motorways that are far higher capacity and not constrained to a route planned over a hundred years ago and built as poverty relief works rather than a viable route.

Most of the country got stone walls and follies as poverty relief works, the west got a railway that would never support itself...

Now, if we could get back to your insistence that 1984 was recently and that investment happened in years it didn't in Dublin we might be able to work around your obsession with an actually populated area getting crucial infrastructural works in preference to rural areas getting a train set.

Your argument that money can be saved on projects in the east is invalid also. Sure, if money can be saved on these, great. Still doesn't justify spending money on a folly in the West to placate a group of QUANGOs with a superiority complex.

Gruffalo

Schuhart wrote: »

Thanks for implicitly recognising that you can’t refute my points.

Thanks for yet again assuming what is incorrect.

Well, efforts to prevent Dublin’s population growth have certainly failed and private sector investment has tended to concentrate there.

It should not be about preventing Dublin's Growth. More about developing the whole country.

But I thought the issue was more about you insisting that Government saw Dublin as a priority.

Actually my original point was that Dublin would be best served by making sure that its own investments and projects were run effectively. For example, if the Metro North project were to run over by 10% it would cost the taxpayer more than the WRC and a few years of it's subvention.

I don’t see any evidence for saying they have concentrated in Dublin. For the sake of argument, we spend twice as much on subsidising rural school transport services as we do on Bus Atha Cliath.

I should have clarified that on this issue I meant all investments. However, it should be noted that by developing the West we can make it more sustainable and reduce subsidising.

So, no, I don’t really think you’ve got the point. Investment in Dublin has not been a priority of Government.

I respectfully disagree

That, can I remind you, is what you claimed. I'm afraid you are simply wrong, there's no polite way around it.

Why start being polite now? lol

Well, I’m not sure what ‘priority’ means here. I don’t think that Dublin has any intrinsically greater or lesser claim on resources than any other region. As I understand it, the project in T21 with the greatest social return from the required investment is the development of Cork suburban services.

Have the funds not already been allocated for this project. I do agree that Cork should be high priority.

So that, in my opinion, is the priority, to be followed by whatever projects produce the next greatest social return. This means, incidently, that the WRC probably wouldn’t even feature on the list.

It would have to feature on the list, even if you put it bottom.

Hopefully this is clear from what I just said. Well, I think the problem is more that you haven’t been following this thread for too long.

The problem (for you) is that I dont agree with you. The list of people who support the project, as previously provided, are far more knowledgable about the benefits that will be brought to the region.

Don’t worry, I’ll make it easy for you so you don’t need to go back over all 100+ pages. Incidently, we’re well aware of the political support for the WRC and the scope of the proposal that those petitioners signed up to.

I do appreciate you making it easy for me. I just disagree with you. That is all.

But on the key point, I’ve already collated the main points as to why the WRC is a bad idea a few pages back in this post. There simply is no case for it.

Thank you for your opinion.

Let me also say, at this stage our discussion is academic. This service is (incredible as it seems) the one element of T21 that we can be absolutely certain will happen. There will be trains running up and down to Athenry in the not too distant future.

Yeah there will be. Where I do agree with you is that this is as far as it should go for the moment. I do agree with the WRC, I just think that in this time of financial difficulty there are a few projects which will help us get through it in a better state. For example,

1. Metro North has the potential to create many jobs and is a vital piece of infrastructure.
2. The interconnecter is again a vital piece of infrastructure which would surely create many jobs.
3. I think we should build more commuter services in Cork e.g. West Cork line
4.Double track Athenry to Galway.

In the meantime the relevant councils along the WRC line should be focusing on growing the relevant population centres along the route.

As I have said, I support the WRC but because of the recession, I do think that for the next four to five years we should focus on projects which will create large employment and have a good financial return. I do not think we should cut back on the money we spend on infrastructure.

L1011

"For example, if the Metro North project were to run over by 10% it would cost the taxpayer more than the WRC and a few years of it's subvention."

No, it'd cost the concessionaire that. Its going to be a fixed price contract just like the Port Tunnel, motorways, etc. It can over run all it bloody well likes and its not going to affect the tax payer.

If you support projects that will create large amounts of employment and give a good financial return, how on earth can you even begin to think of supporting a rural railway that will create minimal jobs during its reconstruction, even less during its operation, and lose money?

Gruffalo

MYOB wrote: »

"If you support projects that will create large amounts of employment and give a good financial return, how on earth can you even begin to think of supporting a rural railway that will create minimal jobs during its reconstruction, even less during its operation, and lose money?

You dodge questions like Bono dodges taxes. Again you have claimed to know better than all the people, previously listed, who support the line. Yet you cannot back it up. You offer no support for your assertion.

If you read my post you will see that I think we should make allowances for the current economic client, in order to steady the ship.

corktina

Gruffalo wrote: »

3. I think we should build more commuter services in Cork e.g. West Cork line
4.

are you mad? The West Cork line is buried under half of Cork City..

.where do you want it to go to? just "WEST" is it? Ballincollig would be the best bet but the potentaial for a rail line just isnt there, particularly one built from scratch. The recently installed bus lane on the Straight Rd together with an express bus might suit much better...

L1011

Gruffalo wrote: »

You dodge questions like Bono dodges taxes. Again you have claimed to know better than all the people, previously listed, who support the line. Yet you cannot back it up. You offer no support for your assertion.

If you read my post you will see that I think we should make allowances for the current economic client, in order to steady the ship.

My assertion is based on the actual reports done in to reopening the line and the later admission that there was faulty reasoning done in them. Go back to about page 10 of this thread for the reports and page 40 for the admission they made errors.

Your claims are based on QUANGOs, petitions gathered in pubs and supermarkets and politicians claiming support based on said petition due to being worried about their votes. Its not based on a single shred of economic reasoning or economic fact.

shamwari

IIMII wrote: »

I hate this thread

I agree. It has gone so far off topic that it has ceased to be relevant.

Carawaystick

Gruffalo wrote: »

If you have a problem with the manner in which the CSO has been quoted then please feel free to take that up with them.

Once again you have no justification for your silly assertion that you know better than them.

No, you linked to an organisation with a vested interest making claims about cso. We'd like the actual cso numbers from the cso, as a fair and neutral piece of evidence.

Partizan

When is the WRC stage 1 (Ennis - Athenry) due to open anyway?

Judgement Day

This Summer according to IE but their definition of when is Summer maybe different to most peoples - don't hold your breath!

murphaph

I'm glad phase I is opening. It will fail miserably and at least then the WDC/WoT etc. etc. etc. can't moan when the rest is canned. Unfortunately the professional whingers west of the shannon who depend on our urban centres of industry for subvention will not be happy until this failed experiment in rail transport is used as justification to can rail projects where they would actually carry passengers. In the current climate, Dublin City needs to be the absolute focus in the national interest because if Dublin fails, Ireland fails-end of story.

Gruffalo

murphaph wrote: »

I'm glad phase I is opening. how kind of you.
It will fail miserably and at least then the WDC/WoT etc. etc. etc. can't moan when the rest is canned. Unfortunately the professional whingers (ah now we get to the heart of the problem, your hatred of anybody not from Dublin) west of the shannon who depend on our urban centres of industry for subvention (subvention which would be reduced by developing the remainder of the country) will not be happy until this failed experiment in rail transport is used as justification to can rail projects where they would actually carry passengers (so know they are trying to end all rail projects in Ireland. That is just to stupid for words). In the current climate, Dublin City (Yeah lets ignore the needs of the rest of the country) interest because if Dublin fails, Ireland fails-end of story.

Try visit the country you live in some time. Your last statement says everything that is wrong with Ireland. Dublin is great, but we are too dependant on it.

So Murph apart from all the projects already scheduled for Dublin, what else should we be doing?

Gruffalo

Carawaystick wrote: »

No, you linked to an organisation with a vested interest making claims about cso. We'd like the actual cso numbers from the cso, as a fair and neutral piece of evidence.

Secondary sources are essential and perfectly legitimate. Used by Academics, news agencies, Governments etc. etc. but maybe you know better.

Gruffalo

MYOB wrote: »

Because I'm not in the West of Ireland with a complex over Dublin getting infrastructure.

Who has this complex? Who is objecting to Dublin getting infrastructure?

Gruffalo

corktina wrote: »

are you mad? The West Cork line is buried under half of Cork City..

.where do you want it to go to? just "WEST" is it? Ballincollig would be the best bet but the potentaial for a rail line just isnt there, particularly one built from scratch. The recently installed bus lane on the Straight Rd together with an express bus might suit much better...

Twas simply meant as an example sweetheart. Although there was another potential route drawn up by Brian Guckian (me thinks). Looked a little ambitous though.

L1011

Gruffalo wrote: »

Who has this complex? Who is objecting to Dublin getting infrastructure?

You, for one; and most of the supporters of the WRC that surface on t'internet.

Gruffalo

MYOB wrote: »

You, for one; and most of the supporters of the WRC that surface on t'internet.

Ah your imagination is troubled on two counts this time:

1. I do not oppose investment in Dublin
2. You think that people in the west say "t'internet". Can you tell the difference between the West of Ireland and the West of Britain?

IIMII

Gruffalo wrote: »

West of Britain?

Is that another dig at Dublin?

L1011

Gruffalo wrote: »

Ah your imagination is troubled on two counts this time:

1. I do not oppose investment in Dublin
2. You think that people in the west say "t'internet". Can you tell the difference between the West of Ireland and the West of Britain?

1: Yet you support taking money from Dublin to support train sets for the WDC to play with
2: I know they don't - I'm FROM the West of Ireland.

murphaph

Gruffalo wrote: »

Try visit the country you live in some time. Your last statement says everything that is wrong with Ireland. Dublin is great, but we are too dependant on it.

So Murph apart from all the projects already scheduled for Dublin, what else should we be doing?

Will you please use the quote function properly so we can quote you back. Using a different colour font within my quotes means you can't be quoted without a load of cutting and pasting, thus rendering the quote function useless!

Anyway, you take the usual tak of saying I hate the rest of Ireland. I don't, I just hate professional moaners who can't acept the reality that this is a very small country and we must centre economic activity in one or two spots to be competitive and effective on a world stage. Diluting our infrastructure is not a good idea and Dublin needs infrastructure now, BEFORE the rest of the country, especially before rural Ireland because if Dublin is held back in any way, you can be assured of a return to economic backwaters.

But you go on ahead and moan that this and that county need their railway while Dublin fails. You will really know all about it when Dublin fails. Slan.

Gruffalo

MYOB wrote: »

1: Yet you support taking money from Dublin to support train sets for the WDC to play with
2: I know they don't - I'm FROM the West of Ireland.

No. the money allocated for the WRC was taken from which specific Dublin project?

murphaph

Gruffalo wrote: »

No. the money allocated for the WRC was taken from which specific Dublin project?

There's only x amount of money in the pot or available to borrow. Spending noney on the WRC means less money for other projects. It's really that simple.

Gruffalo

murphaph wrote: »

Will you please use the quote function properly so we can quote you back.

1. Sorry but I genuinely have not worked out how to use the multi-quote bit

Anyway, you take the usual tak of saying I hate the rest of Ireland.

2. I am sure you do not but I feel like your professional whingers / moaners comment is just an overplayed record. We are neither being anti-dub or unpatriotic when we seek investment outside our capital.

I don't, I just hate professional moaners who can't acept the reality that this is a very small country and we must centre economic activity in one or two spots to be competitive and effective on a world stage.

3. I and they just disagree with you. I think we could develop a few more areas, though not as big as Dublin. If I wanted to go overboard I would be looking for major investment in my own neck of the woods, the midlands, but that would be a bit mad.

Diluting our infrastructure is not a good idea and Dublin needs infrastructure now, BEFORE the rest of the country, especially before rural Ireland because if Dublin is held back in any way, you can be assured of a return to economic backwaters.

4. It is already getting a lot of infrastructure under Transport 21. What else do you actually want? So far you are just demanding that money not to be spent on areas outside Dublin. Well on what specific project should it be spent?

I have already stated that I do not think the remainder of the WRC should be built straight away. I am more in favour of completion by 2020, there are steps to be taken first.

But you go on ahead and moan that this and that county need their railway while Dublin fails. You will really know all about it when Dublin fails. Slan.

5. Dublin will not fail. Now you are sounding like some young fella who has never been through a tough time before. I believe in developing our country and making more regions sustainable, thus reducing these subventions. I do think some of the subventions are ridiculous e.g. subsidising people to fly across the country. Let them take the train or the bus.

Schuhart

Gruffalo wrote: »

It should not be about preventing Dublin's Growth. More about developing the whole country.

Absolutely. However, you’ll understand, the emphasis in State policy has exactly been about preventing Dublin's Growth. The deliberate stunting of Dublin Airport’s runway as part of the Shannon stopover arrangement is the most obvious example of this.

But you are entirely correct. There is no need to have a fetish about the growth of Dublin, yet it is politically impossible to advocate Dublin’s development as a positive thing.

Gruffalo wrote: »

Actually my original point was that Dublin would be best served by making sure that its own investments and projects were run effectively. For example, if the Metro North project were to run over by 10% it would cost the taxpayer more than the WRC and a few years of it's subvention.

Indeed, but I’m not confident that you’ve produced evidence of any cost overruns in the past. DART cost a fair amount for the time, but I don’t think there was any actual overrun. Luas cost more than budgeted. But, as we’ve seen, its per capita cost was still only a fraction of what was spent on Limerick-Ennis.

As I’ve said, the annual subsidy for all Dublin’s public transport operations (as distinct from capital) is probably less than the cost of the rural school transport service. I think, if you reflect on it, you are confusing the investment promised under Transport 21, which hasn’t actually taken place, as if it was investment actually made. As before, not that much has actually been spent on the city, and what has been spent is justified by the usage.

Gruffalo wrote: »

I should have clarified that on this issue I meant all investments. However, it should be noted that by developing the West we can make it more sustainable and reduce subsidising.

Well, I’m happy if this is what you are now saying. But I think it fair to point out that this is not what you said initially and, tbh, I still wonder if you’ve quite got the point. The continuing growth in Dublin and decline in the West’s relative share of population is the outcome of the failed attempts to make the West more sustainable.

The WRC is just the same old tune again, and you have really done nothing to say why it should be any different to the 101 other things that have been thrown at the West at great expense while Dublin and the East was neglected.

Gruffalo wrote: »

It would have to feature on the list, even if you put it bottom.

If you reflect on it, this would only be for the optics. The point is that the project would not be considered for action for the foreseeable.

Gruffalo wrote: »

The problem (for you) is that I dont agree with you. The list of people who support the project, as previously provided, are far more knowledgable about the benefits that will be brought to the region.

Well, no, I don’t agree they would be more knowledgeable as they have failed to make a case. I’ve drawn your attention to the material that suggests the project is pointless so its frankly unfair of you to try and skip past that evidence as if it was merely my ‘opinion’.

Can you present the deep analysis NUI Galway put in to the WRC before lending their name to the campaign? No, because it doesn’t exist. All any of those bodies saw was the word “Western”, so they signed up the way they’d sign up to any old thing that meant public money being spent in the West.

So, tbh, if you think you can hide from the need to substantiate your opinion by waving that list around, you’re wrong. Where is your actual evidence to say this project brings worthwhile benefits? I’ve presented evidence, for example, that the Dept of Transport assessment is that its not a useful use of resources. Where’s your evidence for your view?

Gruffalo

Schuhart wrote: »

Luas cost more than budgeted.

As I’ve said, the annual subsidy for all Dublin’s public transport operations (as distinct from capital) is probably less than the cost of the rural school transport service.

This would be more reason for developing the country outside Dublin and thus reduce the subsidies.

I think, if you reflect on it, you are confusing the investment promised under Transport 21, which hasn’t actually taken place, as if it was investment actually made.

No but keep thinking.

As before, not that much has actually been spent on the city, and what has been spent is justified by the usage.Well, I’m happy if this is what you are now saying.

The WRC is just the same old tune again, and you have really done nothing to say why it should be any different to the 101 other things that have been thrown at the West at great expense while Dublin and the East was neglected.

Dublin and the East neglected? I can hear the little violins playing.

Well, no, I don’t agree they would be more knowledgeable

Of course you wouldn't.

Can you present the deep analysis NUI Galway put in to the WRC before lending their name to the campaign?

I do not need to. They are a highly respected institution and as such their very name carries more credibility than you. If you think you know better than them, which naturally you do, feel free to challenge them.

All any of those bodies saw was the word “Western”, so they signed up the way they’d sign up to any old thing that meant public money being spent in the West.

Ooh strong words little keyboard warrior.

So, tbh, if you think you can hide from the need to substantiate your opinion by waving that list around, you’re wrong.

The list of people which contains people who are far more qualified than you to speak on the matter, plus others, substantiates my opinion. If you think you know better than them perhaps you should challenge them and discredit them.