Patton Flyer on RTE 1 now.

Ham'nd'egger

As the title suggests, there is a piece about this service on the 1PM news and This Week show on RTE Radio 1....

AlekSmart

RTE can sometimes take the concept of News reporting to heights never envisaged by the great media moguls of old.

The central issue is presented as being one of the poor people of Dalkey being deprived of a "Local" service being provided by an enterprising young businessman.

This angle,of course, allows for substantial grandstanding by the reporter/producer and for "Man of the People" pahlavah to be trotted out.

We were even treated to local political luminary Fiona O Malley to trot out the "Facilitate the enterprise economy" line.

Trevor Patton has decided to become the man of the people in this scenario and has stated his intentions quite clearly.

He used an interesting little verbal side step when confronted with the illegality of Patton Flyers operations....."contracted to a Bus company" sez Trev....no doubt with an eye to making a written statement for the Rozzers...."Not me Bud...it`s some fella I met down the Queens last week..".

Trevor is not willing to abide by the Departments Rule Book and has therefore written some new addenda of his own,which presumably he will require other operators to adhere to ?

In the Patton Flyer case,RTE not for the first time,have chosen to ignore the Departments reasons for Pattons displeasure.......

THERE IS A PRIOR APPLICATION FOR THE ROUTE FROM ANOTHER OPERATOR WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED UPON.

If the RTE News Editor were really dedicated to the concept of investigative reporting then he/she would have ferreted away to find the identity of the other entity and do some probing as to why this operator has remained silent at Pattons smash and grab raid ?

Also RTE could well have drawn the parallell between Bus Atha Cliath`s Immediate compliance with the Departments dictat when advised of the EXACT same situation in the Swords Express vs 41X situation.

Instead RTE found it easier to give some articulate customers airtime to confer sainthood status on Trevor Patton.

They even got to pay lip service to the awful situation with the 1932 Transport Act and it`s supposed inadequacies,many of which remain somewhat vague and are rarely quantified by those who rail against it....Its like being agin Poverty and for Freedom until one is asked to define what both these terms actually mean to them !!!

At the end of the day we either have a lawful situation or we don`t.

If Trevor Patton considers the Departments handling of his licence application to be defective then it is open to him to seek a Judicial Review of the Department`s and Ministers actions.

Trevor Pattons current stance is almost identical with that which has made effective millionaires of the residents of Dunsink Lane who merely had to stick it out and face down the forces of Law and Order.

It`s now only a matter of time before this form of "Passive" resistance becomes accepted as the best way of getting what you want in modern Ireland....

dewsbury

...mmm... previous post sounds like somebody with a personal gripe against Mr. Patton.

He is certainly bending/breaking rules but the concept is good and the service is excellent.
7 Euros from Dalkey to the airport in greater comfort than most taxis which would cost perhaps 7 times as much.

Calina

However, if he is operating without a licence, then he should not be operating at all. The remit is for him to get a licence.

I have issues with how things are done in this country and the issuing of licenses to public transport operators appears to be rather inefficient on occasion. It does not excuse this, however.

Onus is to get licence and operate, not to operate and say poor me I haven't got a licence. The rules should apply to everyone equally and other companies are not operating in this way.

AlekSmart

Nope,dewesbury (Yorkshire ??),not a personal gripe in my grape sac at all.

My gripe if it be that,is with our peculiarly self-serving attitudes towards ANYTHING remotely resembling the imposition of rules designed to make life easier for everybody.

Instead we bludgeon on through with a never ending succession of excuses,get outs,if`s,but`s and maybe`s each designed to ensure that NO rules are ever allowed to reach the stage where we all know where we stand.

If,as in this case,we have an elected Government which purports to Govern in a responsible manner then I expect It to at least pay lip service to the principle of abiding by the Law,even the bits we don`t really take a shine to....:o

The goodness of the concept and the excellence of it`s service is not at issue here except perhaps in reference to the Department of Transport`s committment to the same internal ideals.

By all means allow the Patton Flyer to "regularize" the claim which it has jumped,BUT and it`s a gigantic BUT,if we collectively accept that as a new innovative administrative policy then we better not start bleating when that principle is in turn applied to other area`s of our everyday lives..

The Patton Flyer is of little importance in all of this,but for the fact that Mr Patton appears to be the Ballsiest of Public Transport "Contractors" yet to surface in an industry where being Ballsy is regarded as a given ....

He has and continues to rock the Departmental foundations to their core,but in doing so he may well have painted himself and his operation into a corner.....We shall await developments !!

Aye up Lad...???

HydeRoad

The only people that get anything done in this country are the people who 'put it up,' as it were. The Trevor Pattons, the Michael O'Learys, et al, who say 'stuff you, I'm going ahead and doing it.'

You don't have to LIKE these people. You don't have to AGREE with them. They are often brash or abrasive people, who bend or break the rules at times, simply to progress. Because we don't set an example of progress in this country. It comes from the top. The politicians of today are only interested in one thing at the moment, that is hiding their affairs from the media and the public, or publicly supporting their colleagues who are trying to hide their affairs. Bus licences are simply not an issue. Shining a light into governmental inefficiency is not a priority.

Priorities in this country begin and end with the next election. Looking after the boys who got you elected last time. And looking after the boys who will get you elected next time. Getting into power. Staying in power. That's where it begins. That's where it ends.

Politicians promise great manifestos every four years. After the dust settles, and just in time for the next election campaign, a small residue of substance actually filters through. A few roads, perhaps, maybe a tram line. And you can guarantee, that whatever fraction of the infrastructure that was promised, that actually comes to fruition, will be an ass. Something will be wrong. Badly designed roads. Half measures. Under-capacity. Unfinished work. Sub-standard fittings. Fans in tunnels that don't work. It's gone. It's paid for. We've moved on. It's a non-issue. The metro is coming.

Can you blame, therefore, exasperated entrepreneurs and businessmen, with an idea, who forge their own channel? Their eye is on the profit. Period. But then, that is their drive. That is their reward. It sucks. It all sucks. But it's how things get done. Anything good in this country was built by people who broke the mould, who didn't sit around waiting for the state to do it.

Michael O'Leary gave us cheap flights. I hate the man. I'd DEFINITELY hate to work for him. But he gave us that. And he reaps a large reward. But we can fly off at the drop of a hat.

The state gave us the RPA. The toll bridge. the M50. The HSE. I'd say we need more Trevor Pattons, and less Noel Dempseys.

dewsbury

I have got to admit I am more with HYDEROAD on this matter.

(I wonder does HYDEROAD live on Hyde Road which is where the flyer starts).

And no, ALEKSMART the Dewsbury name is not Yorkshire connection ... just a whim of a decision that I ended up stuck with.

I will be boarding the flyer on Wednesday .... Wave if you see me !!

trellheim

Funnily enough you will find Mr. O'Leary has a licence to operate all his routes. If he tried to do Dublin-Heathrow without a slot allocation you would find a lot of people paying close attention very fast.

AlekSmart

Dewsbury,Just let me know which side of the coach you`ll be sitting on and I`ll get my giant Irish Hand ready for a Mexican wave as you proceed past

Whilst I do see Hyde Road `s point and accept it as being somewhat true I also find that the best proponents of this type of Social Engineering are mostly now somewhat ....dead, Mr Hitler.....Mr Stalin...Mr Pol Pot....Mr Hussein....retired....Mr Castro ....or awaiting a decision....Mr Mugabe.

For me d`you see I see the Bus Route Licence as a red herring...It`s the principle what matters Guv.

If one succeeds in usurping the sitting tenant`s power on a single issue then one HAS to move on to the next big thing and that may well be something somewhat more fundamental such as the freedom of Another individual to poach Mr Pattons manor...;)
If such a threat were to mainfest itself to the Patton Flyer,whom would Mr Patton look to for succour or protection or would he simply use whatever means were at his disposal to protect himself ?

Kneebones,Thighbones,Hipbones..they are all connected in this skeleton,damage one and it impacts on the viability of the entire...But accepting that principle is probably considered old-fashioned and restrictive so its more acceptable to embrace modernity and RTE`s warm glowing piece on the awfulness of Expensive Taxi`s out in the Borough !!!

HydeRoad

The world seems to be left with just two alternative visions of human society. A communist, socialist, everythingallintheonepot society, run by paranoid, corrupt, power-crazed, despotic leaders, or a capitalist, profit-driven, survivalofthefittest society, run by paranoid, corrupt, power-crazed, despotic leaders.

Either way, a band of very rich and powerful people will rise to the top, and promptly slam the door shut, and shoot anyone who threatens their totopoly.

And yes, that debate is a long way from a licence to run a bus service between a sleepy coastal village and a tinpot airport on an insignificant speck in the Atlantic Ocean, but there you are...

Guy:Incognito

Think I'll take my car out tomorow and do a spot of taxi'ing. Seems you dotn need to bother with all that licence malarkey anymore.

HydeRoad

Touché. Actually, many of the taxi licences out there are owned by people whose brothers and cousins sat the test for them, and who don't have the first qualification for the job. And the state isn't too bothered about that either. Maybe when the state actually considers the problem of unsuitable taxis driven by unqualified drivers, they will start considering unlicensed bus services operated by renegade operators, or looking at outdated legislation.

If there's time left after listening to Bertie's explanation of his finances in the Dáil...

KC61

Dewsbury,

I'd have to say that I think you misinterpreted Alek's comments above.

The point that I think he was making is that the entire licensing system needs to be overhauled, and quickly, as it is blatantly unfair and not being administered effectively. It does not help when one operator just decides to ignore everything and operate a service regardless of whether he is licensed to do so or not.

Dublin Bus were instructed twice to cancel or reroute bus services because they were not permitted to operate them (i.e. three additional 25X buses cancelled and the 41X not permitted to operate via the Port Tunnel). They had to do this, yet our friend the Patton Flyer just continues operating regardless.

Similarly, the real question that needs to be asked of the Department is why in any circumstances it can sit on a licence application for over TWO years (Patton Flyer and Dublin Bus route 141 being two examples). Who is the other operator that has applied for a similar route licence and not been approved yet? This is the real nub of the problem. The entire process is being administered in true civil service fashion - do nothing where any potential conflict occurs.

I would say that Alek hit the nail on the head. While the Patton Flyer is offering an excellent service, he is unfortunately not licensed to do so. As a result, this may not bode well for them when eventually the licences do get issued. Whenever that may be? 2010 a good guess?

Red Alert

I would favour being liberal enough to people like Mr. Patton as long as Dublin Bus is afforded the opportunity to run revenue-generating services without having to worry about upsetting certain operators like Morton's who are quick on the Joe-Duffy phone to complain. We have an over-regulated and antiquated system of bus licensing here that works against the state bus company that we all pay for, and privates who just want to get on with it and run services. The only people our system facilitates at this stage is bus companies who want to destroy dublin bus and blame it for all their ills without being imaginative themselves. I hope Mr. Patton gets his license.

meathstevie

Folks, forgive my bias as I am a taxidriver. The guy hasn't got a licence so he shouldn't operate, neither should an unlicenced taxi, pub, off licence or bookie or whatever the hell.. . As for pricing : 7 Euro ? I'll happily pick up 7 people outside the church in Dalkey and bring them to the airport for 49 Euro a couple of times every morning. I even doubt it if my meter will have clocked up 49 Euro by the time I get to the airport.

lostexpectation

i read that that hes been waiting for over a year for decision, is that true.


have they stopped if so why not.

AlekSmart

It appears that the Patton licence application may be almost 2 years with the Authorities ("These things take time,Y`know") which in anybodys terms would appear to be unreasonable.

However,if the Department advised Mr P that his application could not be adjudicated upon until the PRIOR one had been dealt with,then who is the VERY patient other applicant patiently awaiting their bit of attention from the established Civil Service ?

It now appears that the ONLY entities who MUST accept the Departmental way of doing things are the respectable CIE group companies.

I feel that there remains considerable scope for a legal challenge to the Department of Transports slothfullness on the grounds of the unreasonable delay causing a quantifiable loss to the CIE companies.

The only thing missing is a strong enough Chief Executive with the same determination as Mr Patton who would instruct lawyers to serve notice on the Minister seeking redress....

Though now that I think of it,I wonder if any employee of Bus Atha Cliath or Bus Eireann could perhaps through their Union take such a legal action on the grounds of the detrimental effect of such incompetence upon their Job Security...???

As Meathstevie so eloquently shows,its the Taxi drivers who are the main losers in the Patton Flyer scenario and who perhaps might consider investigating what role the Office of Taxi Regulation should be playing in supporting the image of the Trade when it is under direct attack from unlicenced competition,even if that competition is a 33 seat PSV

dewsbury

AlekSmart wrote: »

,its the Taxi drivers who are the main losers in the Patton Flyer scenario and who perhaps might consider investigating what role the Office of Taxi Regulation should be playing in supporting the image of the Trade when it is under direct attack from unlicenced competition,even if that competition is a 33 seat PSV

Perhaps taxi drivers are losing out but surely the point has been proven. I.e. there is a demand for a service such as the flyer.
The bus service is of general benefit to society and common sense indicates that such a service should exist.

I am sure that in five years time the service will exist (not necessarily run by Mr. Patton). Taxi drivers will lose out in the longer term.

AlekSmart

Ya never waved !!!!
The point was never there to be proven.....somebody was already in the process of proving it to the Department when Mr P decided to get his proof in first....just like one`s retaliation !!

I have little doubt but that the Routing will be still there in 5 years,as it`s obvious that there is a demand.
However such innovation is not the sole preserve of the Patton`s of this world.

I`m sure there remains a story to be told as to why it seems Dublin Bus were given the Departmental nod to increase the 746 (Dun Laoire/Dublin Airport) frequency whilst extending it to 24 hr operation...however it suddenly transpired that the Dept Nod was in fact a shake and the extension/improvement was "deferred".

Indeed at one point,drivers were suggesting that Dublin Bus modify the 746 to utilize the then unopened Port Tunnel (a là the P Flyer) but it seems that the Dept also had some "Issues" with that too..

At the nub of all this nonsense is a Department of Transport which appears decidedly uncomfortable with the realization that it is expected to control and regulate its Public Transport system.

A forward thinking Department fronted by a visionary Minister or Departmental Secretary would have been paying Bus operators to send as many routes through that Port Tunnel as would physically fit....instead we have to endure tales of civil servants being dispatched to sit outside the portal counting Dublin Bus vehicles in case they were sneaking them through....I suspect even Jesus would weep if he had to read this !!

Fratton Fred

meathstevie wrote: »

Folks, forgive my bias as I am a taxidriver. The guy hasn't got a licence so he shouldn't operate, neither should an unlicenced taxi, pub, off licence or bookie or whatever the hell.. . As for pricing : 7 Euro ? I'll happily pick up 7 people outside the church in Dalkey and bring them to the airport for 49 Euro a couple of times every morning. I even doubt it if my meter will have clocked up 49 Euro by the time I get to the airport.

Excellent, I am off to the airport at 5am on Saturday, can you take me there and back again that night for €12. It always makes me laugh that I can spend more on a taxi to the airport than the flight costs me to London:D

i thought this forum was supposed to support public transport, not slate it. The service is needed and popular, the fact someone has broken the law by stepping in says more about the law and the licensing system than it does about Mr Patten.

If someone else has applied for the licence, great, give it to them and get the service up and running, in the meantime, I'll see you at Cuala 5am Saturday, unless I find another 6 people (with no bags) willing to grab a cab.

markf909

Fratton Fred wrote: »

i thought this forum was supposed to support public transport, not slate it. The service is needed and popular, the fact someone has broken the law by stepping in says more about the law and the licensing system than it does about Mr Patten.

I dont think anyone has a problem with the service, more the way that DB (and other operators) could not do something similar to enable better services.

The only people to blame are the faceless officials in the Dept of Transport.

dewsbury

AlekSmart wrote: »

Ya never waved !!!!

I DID wave.

Wasn't that you in I waved to in the long flowing pink dress?

KC61

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Excellent, I am off to the airport at 5am on Saturday, can you take me there and back again that night for €12. It always makes me laugh that I can spend more on a taxi to the airport than the flight costs me to London:D

i thought this forum was supposed to support public transport, not slate it. The service is needed and popular, the fact someone has broken the law by stepping in says more about the law and the licensing system than it does about Mr Patten.

If someone else has applied for the licence, great, give it to them and get the service up and running, in the meantime, I'll see you at Cuala 5am Saturday, unless I find another 6 people (with no bags) willing to grab a cab.

No one is criticising the actual service offered by Mr. Patton. As you correctly observe, the problem is the law and the administration of it.

The problem is that all of the other operators have had to abide by the law of the land, and he has not.

The route licensing process is taking far too long to administer, and at the same time no one is taking an overall view with regard to network design. We know of two licence applications that have taken the Department over 18 months to deliberate on, while passengers are just supposed to continue as normal. Dublin Bus are being restricted from introducing any new services on the Swords and Lucan corridors because the Department "thinks" that they could be sued by private operators. Meanwhile people are being left behind at bus stops.

What is needed is a straightforward licensing process with an integrated network design. There is plenty of room for privately operated express services such as this alongside the Dublin Bus services, but the system needs professional managing - which it has not got at the moment. The customer ends up the loser....again.

Tarabuses

Why is the Department allowing this situation to continue?

Spook_ie

dewsbury wrote: »

...mmm... previous post sounds like somebody with a personal gripe against Mr. Patton.

He is certainly bending/breaking rules but the concept is good and the service is excellent.
7 Euros from Dalkey to the airport in greater comfort than most taxis which would cost perhaps 7 times as much.

Ah to be sure if you asked around you could find plenty of unlicensed ( therefore uninsured ) 7 seater vans to act as a taxi and take 7 of you to the airport for €7 each........

KC61

Tarabuses wrote: »

Why is the Department allowing this situation to continue?

That is INDEED the question......

lostexpectation

so what's the delay on the other decision of the other license

of they can impound drink they impound this guys buses

trellheim

They can fine him 5 old pounds a day I believe.

The insurance is the one that gets me. As someone else pointed out, if an unlicenced hack/taxi driver carried 7 people to the Airport and was caught, the Gardai would have a word or two.

And if there was a crash, the Insurance Company would limit its losses since the vehicle was not operating as insured.

More, a taxi driver without a permit cannot pick up at Dublin Airport [ a body under DOT I believe ]

How, then , can the Patton Flyer ? Surely DAA would check his licence first ?

Also, the NRA , another body under DOT, could refuse passage through the tunnel for fear of passenger claims since the service is unlicenced.

And so on. Julie hopes we'll all shut up though.

AlekSmart

Oh I`ll bet Julie wishes this entire thing would just go PUFF!.

The reality for the Department and for the other statutory agencies involved is that every day that the Patton Flyer continues to operate as a knowinglly illegal service is reducing their comfort zone.

The role of the insurance provider in this situation has as yet not been probed too deeply.
Whether or not a Certificate of Motor Insurance remains valid IF the operator KNOWINGLY continues to operate following a declaration of illegality is a moot point and one which perhaps the Irish Insurance Federation would do well to address.

Trevor Patton has so far played a blinder and has run a coach and four through the Department`s entire Route Licencing process.

However,even he must accept that there is a substantial uncharted risk attached to his decision.
The extent of that risk may well never be defined BUT,if a major accident/incident should occur involving a Patton operated vehicle then the Insurance situation will be RAPIDLY explained in detail to an assembled incredulous audience.

The longer this nutty situation is allowed to continue the greater the risk of major collerateral damage to a far wider amount of services and systems not all in the transport arena either !

Todays departure of the reigning emperor of Drumcondra does however increase the risk of further delays as Julie and her seniors sit and wonder who they will have to answer to next........:mad:

No way to run a railway !!!!

Carawaystick

has patton actually been convicted of running the service without a license though? if not of course, he's a completely innocent man.

has anyone reported him to the gardaí about this?
A lack of prosecution would allow plausible deniability for his insurance i'd imagine

Victor

Carawaystick wrote: »

has anyone reported him to the gardaí about this?

The department claim they have.

AlekSmart

That "Claim" is indeed an interesting aspect to the entire sorry saga.

The original Irish Independent article quoted a Department Official as saying the matter had been placed in the hands of the Gardai on the 14th October 2007.

AFAIAA No further statements have been issued apart from Noel Dempsey skirting around the issue on Pat Kenny`s Radio prog.

There has been some reference to the Gardai reverting to the Department seeking "Clarification" of some aspects,but nothing specific on what aspects are shrouded in mystery.

If it continues for much longer then the newly formed Garda "Cold-Case" unit will have something nice and meaty to get its teeth into.

trellheim

umm you forgot the dail stuff I posted where he agreed it was illegal


see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55375964&postcount=11

Carawaystick

trellheim wrote: »

umm you forgot the dail stuff I posted where he agreed it was illegal


see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=55375964&postcount=11

No offence trellheim, but if Noel Dempsey told e the sun would rise tomorrow, I'd rush out and buy candles....:D

Carawaystick

Victor wrote: »

The department claim they have.

they claim they're processing applications for new routes too...

if they quoted a pulse number from when they made a complaint to the cops..

meathstevie

"I thought this forum was supposed to support public transport, not slate it. The service is needed and popular, the fact someone has broken the law by stepping in says more about the law and the licensing system than it does about Mr Patten."

The bottom line still is the same : no licence = no operation. It's beside the point whether the licencing is slow or thick or whatever, the licencing procedure is identical for everyone who wishes to apply and should be respected. If not I could open a shebeen tomorrow and if the gardai raid me I'll them a South Dublin bus operator can operate a business without a proper licence and as a consequence so can I... see what the judge will have to say to that :mad:. Why not open a brothel and advertise openly and have an open door policy as well ? It can be argued that there's a high demand for the service and it could benefit society as well bringing prostitution out in the open... It's just daft to think that the law applies to everyone except Mr Patton.

As for airport permits : they only deal with providing a service on DAA operated/owned terrain. As such the airport permit system is seperate from the issue.

AlekSmart

Meathstevie sez "As for airport permits : they only deal with providing a service on DAA operated/owned terrain. As such the airport permit system is seperate from the issue.

Well now,I`m unsure of that as the Flyer uses DAA property to operate from on the return trip to Dalkey.
The entire point of the DAA`s regulations on Taxi operators securing a seperate permit is thrown into turmoil if the DAA fails to enforce the same regulations on other operators who offer their public carriage services at the same location.

From my perspective the DAA is running the risk of having it`s own Permit system challenged by some enterprising Taxi operator on the grounds of it (The DAA) failing in its duty to ensure that its system operated fairly and without favour (Natural Justice perhaps ?)

The Patton Flyer operation is really not the issue here at all.
The core issue remains the inability of a Government Department to enforce it`s own long standing and universally known regulations when confronted with a challenge from whatever source.

This entire situation is FAR more serious to the fabric of Governance than a mere spat between a Bus Operator and a Civil Servant...It cuts directly to a General Principle of Democratic Government.......Who is In Charge. ? :eek:

Boardsbud

Well said AlekSmart. The problem in this country is that we have effectively been running without any sort of leadership from the top down for donkeys years. Our esteemed Taoiseach disappeared anytime a difficult or unpopular decision had to be made and was rarely to be seen defending the need for proper law and order. This attitude has filtered down through society with nobody wanting to take responsibility for anything anymore. Sub committees and "expert" commissions are appointed to decide on everything and then the government shrug their collective shoulders and say that they're only implementing the reccomendations of these "experts".
I'm waiting for the "task force" on public transport provision by opportunistic private operators or PTPBOPO (nearly as good as HIQA, bless you) to be created any day now to much fanfare with an expensive corporate image and snazy logo and even more expensive but not so snazy membership of assorted FF hangers on.
Sorry if I went a bit OT !

As a final thought I'm reminded of tourist guide books to foreign countries / cities warning tourists of illegal taxi's and minibuses operating. This is an image we generally associate with less well off societies. Maybe its a sign of things to come.
Now anybody want to club in and buy a couple of double deckers that DB can't wait to offload to the UK ? It seems you only need low floor or accesible vehicles, not to mention a licence to operate, if you're a state run company here.

PeeDiddyPaddy

Can't understand why anyone has a problem with PP flyer. It's absoutely great - all our work colleagues use it - why should the company waste €75 getting out to Dun Laoghaire in a grumpy old taxi when they can get a direct swift bus for €7 - personally I find it fantastic - I got that bleedin 746 out to the airport once and was travel sick it took so long not to mention the usual yobos on the back smokin heroin. 746 has inflight drinks it takes so long! Seriously wise up to the gripers - this is a long awaited fantastic public service, use it and stop abusing it

AlekSmart

Holy God PDPaddy...calm down man....Nobody`s abusing the Patton Flyer at all,nor has anybody got a problem with IT per se.

The problems,and they are PROBLEMS rest with Minister Dempsey and his selection of Ministerial Officials who are signing (in administrative terms)their own death warrants by demonstrating their inability to administer their own area of responsibility.

Whether you or any of the P Flyers many customers think it`s the bees knees is irrelevant for the purposes of this debate.

1.Just to recap,it`s perhaps worth stating the Ministers view,given to the Dàil,that operating a Public Service Route without a licence is a CRIMINAL offence.
2.The Department has advised the PFlyers proprietor that it is in breach of the Law.
3.The Proprietor has responded that he is aware of this and that this situation is not his fault (at this stage the arguement SHOULD already be before a Judge)
4.The Gardai,advised several months ago,have not indicated any willingness to respond to an official report of a CRIME being committed on a daily(Hourly) basis
(Slightly O/T,but perhaps the Garda Ombudsmans Office might have an interest in this notable lack of enthusiasm)

All the above is still in the melting pot and still seems to have the Department transfixed.
However things elsewhere are moving on apace.

In Bray,the LICENCED operator Bray Air Taxi,expanded its successful Airport service but was rapidly contacted by the Department and instructed to cease and desist with those extra journeys pending an official application for a Licence variation.
Within a week Aircoach (First Group) decide to activate a long-held licence to extend its existing service to Charlesland/Greystones operating via Bray.

Thus far,Bray Air Taxi has complied with the law and has suffered commercially for this compliance prompting the question as to what will happen should this company either adopt the Patton Flyer`s tactics OR perhaps sue the Department for failure to administer its system in compliance with the Laws governing good and fair governance.

The Department of Transport makes much of the pending EU case on subvention,however with all of their eyes trained upon Brussels perhaps they will completely miss an equally serious legal threat in their own back-yard.

One wonder if the ORIGINAL licence applicant for the Patton Flyer`s routing will step out of the shadows with a writ for Mr Dempsey in order to see how far the Departmental will to ignore its responsibilities actually goes...

Indeed given minister Dempsey`s full and effusive launch speech for Tallaghts new Flybus service,(Brought to us by McConns/Eirebus) it appears that he has little regard for his own greater responsibilities,for example to enforce the provisions of the Equal Status Act 2000 as yet again a NEWLY licenced public service is allowed commence without having any disabled access.

Whilst Minister Dempseys speech went to great lengths to do the "Local Business makes good" thing,he completely avoided any mention of his own responsibilities to oversee inprovements in pubilc transport FOR ALL sectors of the community.

It now seems that only the State companies are tasked with the somewhat more complex and expensive areas of providing Low Floor accessible services at equally low cost whilst the more entreprenurial private sector can concentrate on the simpler higher return "Premium" services.....It`s a policy thats working well in the Health sector so why not continue on a roll....

steve-o

AlekSmart wrote: »

1.Just to recap,it`s perhaps worth stating the Ministers view,given to the Dàil,that operating a Public Service Route without a licence is a CRIMINAL offence.
2.The Department has advised the PFlyers proprietor that it is in breach of the Law.
3.The Proprietor has responded that he is aware of this and that this situation is not his fault (at this stage the arguement SHOULD already be before a Judge)
4.The Gardai,advised several months ago,have not indicated any willingness to respond to an official report of a CRIME being committed on a daily(Hourly) basis
(Slightly O/T,but perhaps the Garda Ombudsmans Office might have an interest in this notable lack of enthusiasm)

Let's not get to excitable about the severity of this "CRIMINAL" offence. If the powers that be want to go through the motions, then a judge has the power to fine Mr Patton up to €63.50. If another complaint is made and Mr Patton returns to court, then he could be hit with a masssive €6.35 for each day that he has continued to flout the law since his orignal conviction. That's all that can happen. Until the law is changed, no-one can stop him operating the service. No-one can impound his vehicles.

dewsbury

As a general point in this good thread.

There are many of this country's high achievers who bend or broke the rules....

Mr. Patten is bending/breaking rules but so did .... Mr xxxxx and Mr yyy and Mr zzz.


???

AlekSmart

Dewsbury wrote

" There are many of this country's high achievers who bend or broke the rules....

Mr. Patten is bending/breaking rules but so did .... Mr xxxxx and Mr yyy and Mr zzz."

True indeed,but....when do the rules become "not the rules" and who decides how far and how often these "rules" are to be broken ?
Do these "rules" not carry any inherent support for those who DO choose to follow them ?

I take the rather simplistic view that if Any Public Administrative body feels that Its own rules are no longer valid,useful or enforceable then it should Immediately seek to set-aside or repeal these rules and announce TO ALL interestyed parties that they are no longer bound by ANY of the original strictures.

There is also the question inherent in Dewsburys observation of what exactly constitutes a "High Achiever" ?
Does this indicate that the Irish commercial or legal framework cannot sustain achievement on its own merits without having to countenance breaking the law as a pre-requisite for success ?

As for steve-o`s points re the €63.50 and the €6.35 per day,this would appear to be the single greatest flaw in the 1932 Act,the simple failure to increase any fines in line with historic inflation.

However,the extent of the fine is not really an issue either,but what would be an issue further down the line in terms of the impending tightening up of all similiar licence holding criteria,would be the requirement to be of "Good Character" or "Good Standing".

It could be argued that an applicant who has consistently failed to acceed to Departmental requests and has continued to operate outside the lawful licencing structure has therefore CHOSEN to remove himself from the legitimate process and therefore must accept the risks which come with that ...

Again it boils back down to the Patton operation being immaterial in all of this but the entire function of the Department of Transport and particularly its higher executives most certainly is under serious scrutiny..

Either the Department has its rules or it does`nt....The ball is firmly in it`s court now !

meathstevie

PeeDiddyPaddy wrote: »

Can't understand why anyone has a problem with PP flyer. It's absoutely great - all our work colleagues use it - why should the company waste €75 getting out to Dun Laoghaire in a grumpy old taxi when they can get a direct swift bus for €7 - personally I find it fantastic - I got that bleedin 746 out to the airport once and was travel sick it took so long not to mention the usual yobos on the back smokin heroin. 746 has inflight drinks it takes so long! Seriously wise up to the gripers - this is a long awaited fantastic public service, use it and stop abusing it

That's when you direct the taxi driver down the M50 or you agree to go the M50. In my books the most cost effective route from Dun Laoghaire to and from the airport goes via Whitehall, Dorset Street, Gardiner Street, Ringsend, Sandymount and the Rock Road. And if you're willing to foot the tolls the Port Tunnel and the Eastlink are the alternative ( what you gain on time and distance will more or less compensate for the tolls ). That's never going to cost 75 euro.

meathstevie

AlekSmart wrote: »

Meathstevie sez "As for airport permits : they only deal with providing a service on DAA operated/owned terrain. As such the airport permit system is seperate from the issue.

Well now,I`m unsure of that as the Flyer uses DAA property to operate from on the return trip to Dalkey.
The entire point of the DAA`s regulations on Taxi operators securing a seperate permit is thrown into turmoil if the DAA fails to enforce the same regulations on other operators who offer their public carriage services at the same location.

From my perspective the DAA is running the risk of having it`s own Permit system challenged by some enterprising Taxi operator on the grounds of it (The DAA) failing in its duty to ensure that its system operated fairly and without favour (Natural Justice perhaps ?)

The Patton Flyer operation is really not the issue here at all.
The core issue remains the inability of a Government Department to enforce it`s own long standing and universally known regulations when confronted with a challenge from whatever source.

This entire situation is FAR more serious to the fabric of Governance than a mere spat between a Bus Operator and a Civil Servant...It cuts directly to a General Principle of Democratic Government.......Who is In Charge. ? :eek:

The Patton Flyer operates from the short term surface car park ( as do a lot of other bus services ). Whether they're actually on the airport permit system or they're admitted on the QT I don't know but I do know that when I operated my taxi at the airport I had to show proof of licencing.

Ah sure, another prime example of the fact that the law is only there for the law abiding people :mad:

trellheim

twould take but an hour to lash through an amending bill to the 1932 act

Ham'nd'egger

trellheim wrote: »

twould take but an hour to lash through an amending bill to the 1932 act

If only it were that easy.

When the Road Transport Act was passed in 1932, it's main issues were to regulate a very loose and renegade bus market with route and operator licenses, to ensure that road freight market ran in some manner of a a coherent network, to allow for the financing of service companies and to allow the replacement of some uneconomic rail services with adequate bus services in conjunction with a railway act of the same year.

Today, EU laws and policies on both transport and free trade need to be finely balanced and as such it is a fine line to cross it and to render it unlawful. One wonders if a correct application of the Act is a better option.

AlekSmart

+1 Ham`nd` egger.....There is a lot of coloured smoke billowing around the Department of Transport regarding the 1932 Act.

However,whats becoming more apparent by the day is the lethargic manner in which the Department conducts its business.

From my perspective the 1932 Act appears to be remarkably well framed with wording and definitions which are bang up to date.

The Act confers extensive discretionary powers upon the Minister for Transport to regulate and direct every facet of Road based Public Transport,something which a long line of Ministers appear reluctant to believe.
This lack of understanding has,I believe,more to do with the Senior Departmental Officials who brief the Minister rather than the Minister hisself/herself.
There is,by now,a pervasive whiff of something not quite right about current Departmental Policy which cannot be explained away by the fear of impending EU legal challenges.

The Port Tunnel 41X routing,The Patton Flyer,The Bray Air Taxi and other such topics have focused attention on what if any ulterior motives lurk within the Departments senior officials hearts......They sure are`nt infused with any great concern for improving the lot of the Public Transport User

It now appears certain that much more Dàil time will be allocated to a complete new Transport Act when large sections of the present one function very well indeed....as Ham `an` egger sez...a bit of application would go a long way !! :eek:

trellheim

If only it were that easy.

the only change would be the increase of a fine of 20% of annual turnover every month until the services cease.

meathstevie

Or just have a traffic unit garda with balls to impound the coach ( or coaches ) there and then as they're used for an illegal activity.

AlekSmart

MeathStevie wrote...."Or just have a traffic unit garda with balls to impound the coach ( or coaches ) there and then as they're used for an illegal activity."


Hear hear Meathstevie.....only problem is that old and highly effective saying......"Well Gard,would you like a pint.....or a transfer ?" :eek: