Bus Éireann Private Hire

Armada

Hi everyone,

just wondering if anyone out there can answer this for me.

Are Bus Eireann allowed/supposed to do Private Hire work?

ie pick up a group and bring them from point A to point B and back again at a specified time etc.

I ask as I just came across a booking form on their website for private coach hire and thought it a bit odd.

http://www.buseireann.ie/bubble.php?id=176

As they are state subsidised, have no insurance, coach repayments etc etc should they be allowed to compete against private operators?

"Our rates for coach hire are very competitive..."

Competition is supposed to be fair in European countries is it not?

Cookie_Monster

Armada wrote: »

Are Bus Eireann allowed/supposed to do Private Hire work?

Yes of course, why wouldn't they be, so are Dublin Bus you know

Armada wrote: »

have no insurance

They have insuarnce, they are self insured.

Armada wrote: »

Competition is supposed to be fair in European countries is it not?

It adds competition the the market and makes it cheaper for the customer, after that who cares? Ryanair/Aer Lingus/ Aer Aran are all subsided on certain routes by the government too...do you have the same problem with that?

Armada

What I meant by no insurance is that the guy setting prices for BE doesn't have to factor in insurance and other costs into his price.

The way I see it, when a private guy gives me a price, he is counting in his cost base, repayments, wages etc etc

Bus Eireann do not need to cover their expenditure (the tax payer does instead), so their prices are simply set lower than the everyone else.

While in the short term this is great for the consumer as prices are lower, the long run is that the market is not viable for private operators and will as such fold, leaving the consumer without choice and Bus Eireann with the monopoly for the whole market.

in the ling run it is the consumer who will suffer as in all Monopoly situations.

Polar101

Armada wrote: »

While in the short term this is great for the consumer as prices are lower, the long run is that the market is not viable for private operators and will as such fold, leaving the consumer without choice and Bus Eireann with the monopoly for the whole market.

Bus Eireann acquiring a monopoly in the coach hire business doesn't seem like a particularly realistic scenario to me - there are private coach companies in Dublin even though you can hire buses from Dublin Bus.

Armada

Yes there are coach hire companies in Dublin and around Ireland but things are changing, economy is getting tighter so the market will get harder along with every other market. Bus Eireann are being told to improve their revenues and as such are targeting private hire work, undercutting private operators. If that continues then it is only a matter of time.

As for Dublin Bus I don't have any experience with them so it would not be fair to comment, do they operate in the same way as BE or do they try to cover their costs? Perhaps there is a fair market in Dublin, I do not know.

Victor

Armada wrote: »

What I meant by no insurance is that the guy setting prices for BE doesn't have to factor in insurance and other costs into his price.

Actually, the level of detail that BÉ and DB have to go to when making sure all these are covered is extraordinary. The have to account for all costs on a PSO / non-PSO basis.

The way I see it, when a private guy gives me a price, he is counting in his cost base, repayments, wages etc etc

BÉ need to cover that also.

Bus Eireann do not need to cover their expenditure (the tax payer does instead)

No, BÉ and DB are given payments for PSO work only. They are only allowed use those vehicles for PSO work. If they use them for non-PSO work, e.g. concerts then the hours, milage, fuels, insurance, etc. all have to be allocated to that work

While in the short term this is great for the consumer as prices are lower, the long run is that the market is not viable for private operators and will as such fold, leaving the consumer without choice and Bus Eireann with the monopoly for the whole market.

You do realise that BÉ is the biggest purchaser of private bus / coach mileage in the country?

Now, that I said that, if private operators want to earn more, then the minister needs to get his thumb out and reform bus licensing and fare setting.

dowlingm

Armada wrote: »

What I meant by no insurance is that the guy setting prices for BE doesn't have to factor in insurance and other costs into his price.

The way I see it, when a private guy gives me a price, he is counting in his cost base, repayments, wages etc etc

Bus Eireann do not need to cover their expenditure (the tax payer does instead), so their prices are simply set lower than the everyone else.

Armada - self-insurance simply means you take the money you would pay an insurer and put it in a fund to defend liability claims. It doesn't mean that BE does not have that cost. Also, the taxpayer does not "cover their expenditure" when it comes to stuff like this. In fact, CIE companies have been known to charge substantial prices and fares for services NOT covered by the PSO agreement with the government. Look at how railfreight has declined because unlike passenger service, Iarnrod Eireann receives no subsidy for such services because the PSO doesn't cover it. Nitelink services are more expensive - why? Because the PSO doesn't cover night services.

How about you find out how BE funding actually works and come back to us then? There is a good discussion to be had about this because it's difficult to be poacher and gamekeeper (i.e. regulator) in these sorts of markets (see also VHI, Aer Lingus, ESB generation...)

parsi

If BE were undercutting then every private-hire would have a red setter on teh side.

Guess what ? They don't.

From what I see it's the exception for the kids to be on a BE bus going on outings.

When I was a kid McElligotts (God love 'em) and Dick Martin (God really love him) had the strangehold on crappy private-hire buses.

Armada

Parsi - I agree, the situation in the past was that BE did very little school outings etc and yes unfortunately crappy private buses were common place however the operators you mention below and others which used "bone shakers" are either gone or have modernised (in the most part at least)

The problem I see is that BE are moving into this side of the market which can only push the private guys out. It is a new issue, the test will be to see if the private guys do survive. If they do, then my whole point goes out the window, its the future situation i am concerned about not the past.

dowlingm - Sorry, I didnt get the self insurance thing when I read it first, my mistake. So CIE have a slush fund to pay for potential insurance claims?

It is obviously a dificult postion to be in as a regulator but doesn't that beg the question why are they the regulator?
Please forgive my ignorance of the technicalities of agreements between CIE and the government, I am simply making a point based on observations. As I see it, BE are using vehicles paid for under these PSO agreements to operate private hire work, if they are required to run these vehicles without state funding assistance then there is no reason they should be charging less than the private guy, unless the private guys are over charging.


In relation to PSO work there has been much publicised events of Bus Eireann using their position unfaily against private operators (Circle Line for one)

L1011

To self-insure here you need to satisfy the Minister that you have enough funds to provide cover as well as lodge a sum defined by him with the High Court. I would assume CIE do this as a sole unit.

Victor

Armada, I'm wondering, do you have any interests in the transport industry, you seem a bit bitter about this.

Armada wrote: »

The problem I see is that BE are moving into this side of the market which can only push the private guys out. It is a new issue, the test will be to see if the private guys do survive. If they do, then my whole point goes out the window, its the future situation i am concerned about not the past.

the private guys have availed of PSO contracts for a long time. CIÉ companies have done private hires for a long time, this is nothing new. If anything, the CIÉ group are losing market share, because of ministerial decisions.

dowlingm - Sorry, I didnt get the self insurance thing when I read it first, my mistake. So CIE have a slush fund to pay for potential insurance claims?

Its an insurance fund, not a slush fund.

It is obviously a dificult postion to be in as a regulator but doesn't that beg the question why are they the regulator?

Teh minister and his staff are the regulator.

As I see it, BE are using vehicles paid for under these PSO agreements to operate private hire work,

If BÉ use a PSO funded bus for private hire, then they have to pay for the use of it.

if they are required to run these vehicles without state funding assistance then there is no reason they should be charging less than the private guy, unless the private guys are over charging.

Its the normal cut an thrust of business. Most bids are probably lost by 5-10%, well within the margins of error and profit. Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Sometimes the private operator can do better because maybe he is based locally. Sometimes BÉ win because maybe they are a bigger organisation and can use their purchasing power. Sometimes the client might only want to have 20 passengers carried - then it might be down to who has the cheapest bus available, someone might have a 24-seater and another only has a 48-seater to hand, in whcih case the 24-seater might win. However, if the owner of the 48-seater has to pay wages to a driver anyway, then he might bid low to minimise his losses. As I said, its the normal cut an thrust of business.

In relation to PSO work there has been much publicised events of Bus Eireann using their position unfaily against private operators (Circle Line for one)

Nothing to do with BÉ. Circle Line were trying to compete with Dublin Bus by charging higher fares and didn't / couldn't advertise properly so people didn't use their services. To prevent a repeat requires action by the minister, not the bus companies. One solution would be higher cash fares offset by lower pre-paid fares linked to smart-ticketing.

antoinolachtnai

I don't know what sector you work in, but it is not 'the normal cut and thrust of business' for a dominant operator to operate below cost or to use NDP money to compete with a private operator. It is also forbidden by the EC treaty articles 80-87.

Do you think BE's operating costs are lower than private operators'?

Who do BE pay to use a PSO bus for non-PSO work? How much do they pay? Can anyone use them, or is it just BE?

Why does BE have more buses than it needs to discharge the PSO, especially given that it hires in extra capacity at certain times of the year to discharge the PSO?

Precisely what PSO agreement does CIE have with the government?

Can you name three PSO contracts that private operators have availed of?

dub_commuter

Quick question for all those backing Bus Eireann.

If they want to run private hire services, then why can't they purchase their own buses that are dedicated to this work, and routes that are not funded by subsidy. This would create a level playing field. Generally I can see why people find it odd that a PUBLIC operator is operating PRIVATE services. CIE maintain that Public Transport is the best model, yet they seem to like the private world when it suits them also. Like they want the best of both worlds.

As I see it at the moment they use buses that are also in subsidized service. This means the buses are already paid for by the Government. You are correct in saying yes they will have to pay for the upkeep of them and will not get PSO for them, but they don't have to totally pay for the vehicles themselves upfront as they already have them. So it isn't a level playing field at all.

There have been occasions on which I have been on private hire vehicles, when my company hired them that have took fares and took on passengers along the way on a bank holiday despite the fact they were supposed to be private hire.

AlekSmart

Opinions dividing along party lines here...as ever

As Victor intimated,Armada`s Op was quite well constructed albeit in a slightly neutral tone

I ask as I just came across a booking form on their website for private coach hire and thought it a bit odd.

It`s a funny old world being a commercial State Sponsored Body....neither fish nor fowl and usually at the mercy of vegeterians

Just as large numbers of Bus Atha Cliath vehicles trundle around bearing aloft "Provided by NDP 2000-2006" stickers when those very vehicles were purchased outfight by the company from its own (scarce) cash resources...however it was deemed politically expedient to "Put on a bit of a show" for visiting dignataries and senior Civil Servants who tend to notice these IMPORTANT things...... :eek:

As I see it Bus Eireann`s private hire work comprises only a small amount of its total business.
The private hire market tends to be a shop-local one with cost being a major factor for the likes of schools or clubs.

However there are those who tend to focus on a larger operator in preference to the "Little Man" simply for the reassurance factor as they PERCEIVE a certain security of service from the Big Lad.

This has,from experience,been noticed at events such as the Slane Concerts where Bus Eireann/Bus Atha Cliath have stepped in on quite a few occassions when for whatever reason the original operator failed to reappear for the return journey.

If Bus Eireann were to disappear tomorrow in a puff of pink smoke,then the other Big Lads such as Kavanagh,Cronin,Barton et al would`nt waste any time moving in for the kill and would have little compassion in stamping on whatever small operator posed a threat to them.....Now that`s nothing personal,it`s just Business !!!!

antoinolachtnai

Are you saying that BE are keeping the small operators in business at present?

'Moving in for the kill' by which I take it you mean selling the same or a similar product below cost with the intent of driving a competitor out of business is illegal. This does not seem to be clearly understood, but it needs to be.

I am pretty certain the non-BE operators would not do anything illegal. In any case, they would not have the market dominance to do this. None of these companies are 'big lads' as you call them. They are relatively modest operations by any standard.

I don't think Bus Eireann would be competing with the very small operators. They are competing with the scale of operators you mention. I would be extremely surprised to hear that any of those operators regularly abandon passengers at events.

I don't see where you are going with remarks about NDP stickers. Buses purchased with profit that arises from PSO routes is still shareholder's (taxpayers') funds. The profit would not have been made at all, without a subsidy, a grant for the bus that is being replaced and which generated the cash, and monopoly rights on certain routes. There is no difference in status between these buses and NDP buses.

(I am not saying it is a bad thing for DB to generate cash, just pointing out that it cannot call the cash it generates its own.)

There is one small possible exception to this - PSO buses purchased with the proceeds of commercial enterprises -. How many PSO buses have been purchased with funds from this source? (In any case, the funds from these ventures originally came from the taxpayer, so it is hard to say that they are completely independent.)

If the business of painting double deckers and renting them out for weddings really is lucrative enough to stand on its own two feet and make money, it might be time for CIE to sell it and other businesses off and get the money it says it needs for PSO services during this time when the government has little capital to invest. On the other hand, if they aren't commercially viable, it's pretty clear what should be done.

AlekSmart

If the business of painting double deckers and renting them out for weddings really is lucrative enough to stand on its own two feet and make money, it might be time for CIE to sell it and other businesses off and get the money it says it needs for PSO services during this time when the government has little capital to invest. On the other hand, if they aren't commercially viable, it's pretty clear what should be done.

I would not be surprised if some form of announcement on this was to be made very soon.
The BAC City Tour operation would I suspect be a prime candidate and would make a good accquisition for the Dualway operation which is of course connected with the Ensign Bus City Tour brand in London and elsewhere.

'Moving in for the kill' by which I take it you mean selling the same or a similar product below cost with the intent of driving a competitor out of business is illegal. This does not seem to be clearly understood, but it needs to be.

My phraseology may be somewhat colourful but I suspect we are back yet again to the definition of the term normal cut and thrust of commercial operations.....:)

Competition is good-market domination is not,therefore in the ideal market place all of the smaller operators would co-exist happily with no single one wanting to expand or become semi-dominant..??? :rolleyes:

[/QUOTE] I am pretty certain the non-BE operators would not do anything illegal.[/QUOTE]

Now whilst I appreciate Antoin may be better placed to be definitive on this I would be less certain of the blanket willingness of All operators to observe the letter of the law.

But then again I may be far to cynical for my own good :eek:

antoinolachtnai

You have lifted my quote a little out of context. I was referring to the non-BE operators you mentioned. I was referring to the competition act. I thought the context made that clear. (I would never make that assertion generally. It amazes me the companies across the sector that appear to have no problem completely ignoring basic safety protocols, for instance.)

To clarify what I said about dominance, let me present the facts.

None of the operators mentioned would hold a dominant position, even if Bus Eireann disappeared in a puff of smoke, or more likely, went on all-out strike. Surely this is obvious? None of them is large enough to dominate. Would there be consolidation? Would some operators turn out to be stronger than others? Probably.

Holding a dominant position is not illegal. (I never suggested it was.)

Abuse of a dominant position is illegal. (This is what the thread is about.)

If DB is selling that one, it might as well sell them all. I don't think a sale to the company you mention would be likely, unless the numbers were very weak indeed.

I wish someone would answer my questions.

Victor

dub_commuter wrote: »

Quick question for all those backing Bus Eireann.

I'm not backing BÉ, merely commenting that the OP's assertions aren't right or at least aren't complete.

If they want to run private hire services, then why can't they purchase their own buses that are dedicated to this work, and routes that are not funded by subsidy.

They do. Dublin Bus buses used for commercial services like Airlink, Nitelink, weddings, tours, etc. are owned by the company with no lien held by the Department of Transport. From time to time, e.g. concerts down the country, much more of the fleet is mobilised for what is a commercial service (I doubt they are private hire as such) - the hours and mileage from the PSO vehicles needs to be repaid by the commercial arm to the PSO arm. Dublin Bus has, over the years done some of its own fleet renewal when it was getting nothing from the department for fleet replacement. I've not actually seen a whole lot of BÉ private operations buses, but I imagine it works in exactly the same manner. But you have to admit that BÉ is the largest purchaser of private buses time / mileage in the country.

This would create a level playing field. Generally I can see why people find it odd that a PUBLIC operator is operating PRIVATE services. CIE maintain that Public Transport is the best model, yet they seem to like the private world when it suits them also. Like they want the best of both worlds.

Doesn't public transport refer to its use by the general public, not the ownership model of the company?

As I see it at the moment they use buses that are also in subsidized service. This means the buses are already paid for by the Government.

I think you need to separate subsidized services (PSO operations payments, social welfare passes, etc.) from capital payments for new buses.

You are correct in saying yes they will have to pay for the upkeep of them and will not get PSO for them, but they don't have to totally pay for the vehicles themselves upfront as they already have them. So it isn't a level playing field at all.

I'm not sure if perfect equality is desireable or practical. Balance should be achievable.

There have been occasions on which I have been on private hire vehicles, when my company hired them that have took fares and took on passengers along the way on a bank holiday despite the fact they were supposed to be private hire.

Did your company take the fare or the bus company?

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

I don't know what sector you work in, but it is not 'the normal cut and thrust of business' for a dominant operator to operate below cost or to use NDP money to compete with a private operator. It is also forbidden by the EC treaty articles 80-87.

I wasn't talking about abuse of dominant position. I was saying sometimes BÉ will be cheaper, sometimes DB, sometimes the private operator. It all depends on circumstances.

Do you think BE's operating costs are lower than private operators'?

Due to their size, certain costs will be lower, but others will be higher. It will depend on the particular circumstances and the mix of costs to decide who is cheapest. If, for example, one operator is busy and will have to pay overtime, then its going to make it difficult for them to get the job. Also its depends on the type of vehicle, interior specification and fuel costs all come into the mix. Do you think BÉ could compete with the operator on the PriceWaterhouseCoopers service, where the incumbent uses midi-buses, whereas BÉ don't use midi-buses in Dublin and so would have to compete with a larger bus.

Who do BE pay to use a PSO bus for non-PSO work? How much do they pay?

I don't know. And the only way we will know is if the department lets us know.

Can anyone use them, or is it just BE?

Why does BE have more buses than it needs to discharge the PSO, especially given that it hires in extra capacity at certain times of the year to discharge the PSO?

Because its a commercial company, which has a responsibility to its shareholders to make a profit. I imagine the fleet is balanced somewhere between the summer tour peak and the winter commuter peak (mostly dictated by school buses, but also people are more likely to walk or cycle in summer).

Precisely what PSO agreement does CIE have with the government?

Good question. I understand is a fudged charter, not a contract.

Can you name three PSO contracts that private operators have availed of?

As contracts: school buses (managed by BÉ), Luas, island ferries, regional air routes. But the social welfare pass scheme is available to many operators, but primarily bus, rail, island ferries and the occassional helicopter (discount, not full price).

antoinolachtnai

Where is the separate PSO 'arm' of Dublin Bus based? Who runs it?

A bus used on a PSO service is still subsidized, even if it isn't bought with a grant. It is bought with shareholders' (taxpayers') funds. It could only be bought becuase of the cashflows that result from the company's unique position in the market.

AlekSmart

Where is the separate PSO 'arm' of Dublin Bus based? Who runs it?

While it`s probably covered by the Official Secrets Act there has been since 2000 a huge amount of Bus Atha Cliath middle management time directed into the collection,collation and forwarding of a VAST amount of financial and statistical data of the most arcane type.

So the answer to Antoins question is most likely the Secretary General of the Dept of Transport who may or may not actually run anything....:eek:

At this moment in time the entire PSO contract regeime is the hottest of potato`s as the preparations for the DTA`s assumption of public transport power proceeds (or at least was proceeding until a month ago).

However,the collapse of Ireland Inc as a viable entity in itself has led to some serious scratching of bald spots.
There is even now a level of doubt as to whether the DTA formation can proceed at all,given the fairly extensive startup costs being spoken of.

Only one public servant in recent times,the late Michael McDonnell chairman of CIE gave any recognition to the concept of the PSO business and indeed he was responsible for Iarnrod Eireann introducing the requirement for DSFA Free Pass holders to obtain an actual ticket.

This of itself yielded a significant amount of information to IE management which heretofore had been ignored or regarded as irrelevant.

In the case of Bus Atha Cliath and Bus Eireann,neither company have been required to do too much dealing in actuality when it came to the DFSA element of the PSO but things are now developing rapidly and some rather unpalatable truths are about to be revealed.

None of the operators mentioned would hold a dominant position

I would accept that the term "dominant" might be somewhat premature in the generality of the business but there are areas where for example The Kavanagh operation would be regarded as being the leading provider or even the likes of Matthews on newer corridor type routes.

It`s an ongoing developmental situation and the next 12 months will bring yet more change in its wake.

I wish someone would answer my questions.

Sadly Antoin`s most desired Christmas present,an answer will hardly be forthcoming from any of those who have the ability to provide it.

The business of modern Irish politics has evolved into avioding that sort of thing......Answers !....what do yiz want them for ?

dub_commuter

Victor wrote: »

They do. Dublin Bus buses used for commercial services like Airlink, Nitelink, weddings, tours, etc. are owned by the company with no lien held by the Department of Transport.

Which buses are you talking about? The buses that are used on the nitelink, airlink, tours etc are the same buses that are used in regular service on PSO routes. The buses would not be there in the first place without the PSO routes.

From time to time, e.g. concerts down the country, much more of the fleet is mobilised for what is a commercial service (I doubt they are private hire as such) -

What? Like the Ryder Cup, when our beloved public operator used all the newest buses on a shuttle whilst digging the oldest buses out of retirement to use on public service because it felt that earning money from the private sector and commercial ventures was more important than the people who pay for their every day occurrence?

the hours and mileage from the PSO vehicles needs to be repaid by the commercial arm to the PSO arm. Dublin Bus has, over the years done some of its own fleet renewal when it was getting nothing from the department for fleet replacement.

Yes. But if it wasn't for the PSO routes in the first place we know that the new buses would not be there. The money that is being brought in via the PSO and other funding, is freeing up cash to purchase vehicles that would otherwise be needed elsewhere. In some cases, where funding has been made for new buses (I know that most have not been purchased by the government before you ask), some years down the line DB will sell the buses, which they never paid for, for cash, which directly increases their balance sheet by selling assets they never paid for.

Doesn't public transport refer to its use by the general public, not the ownership model of the company?

It depends which way you spin it, it's a public run industry for the public ran by public sector workers. People can interpret it differently. Personally I prefer not to use spin as there is no point. I leave that to the politicians.

I wasn't talking about abuse of dominant position. I was saying sometimes BÉ will be cheaper, sometimes DB, sometimes the private operator. It all depends on circumstances.

But DB has a large fleet of buses, which if they didn't get any money from the government in the first place, they would not have, if someone needs a private hire service, they will have more vehicles available directly because of this.

antoinolachtnai

So there isn't a distinct arm of Dublin Bus which runs these commercial operations.

PSO contracts have to be in place by 1 December 2009, no?

Dublin Bus must be collecting that information for their own internal use. The Department of Transport have no operational information about Dublin Bus other than what is in the MoU's. Anyway, once the contracts are in place, all the operational information will be subject to FOI.

My remarks about 'dominance' are really completely hypothetical, because BE is not going to disappear in the puff of smoke and a major strike at the present time is even less likely. But the narrow way you are defining the marketplaces (in terms of individual corridors) is not really how the precedents have gone.

Being a 'leader' certainly would not make an operator dominant.

AlekSmart

PSO contracts have to be in place by 1 December 2009, no?

Dublin Bus must be collecting that information for their own internal use. The Department of Transport have no operational information about Dublin Bus other than what is in the MoU's.

Dec 1 2009 is the current stated date for the PSO`s,however I would see massive problems for the Dept in meeting that deadline.
Realistically we could add another 9 months to that before the implimentation of "full" PSO status.

The Department of Transports possession of "operational Information" on the activities of the CIE Bus companies is extensive.

However as with all things political it can often be expedient (Particularly for Ministers for Transport in the recent past) for the relevant Official to plead ignorance,"nobody told me anything".

Suffice to say that CIE Bus Company managers have been spending far more time chasing down and forwarding information to the Department of Transports MANY differing sections,not all of which are in direct communication with each other.

With the impending arival of a Commission on Transport Regulation we can rest far easier in our beds that the responsibilities of a Minister for Transport will now be even less as soon as a Proffessor Drumm type figure can be found to take the flak for Noel and his chums.

antoinolachtnai

Having PSO contracts in place by then is a requirement of EU law, I think. There has been quite a bit of notice of this.

AlekSmart

Yup,The PSO gig is indeed a requirement of EU law.

However as the Court of First Judgement`s ruling in the Ryanair/Waloonia case today demonstrates,EU law can be subject to alteration and amendment as a result of many different types of case.

In Irelands case our Political Leaders have historically preferred to be "Good Europeans" in terms of how we addressed EU requirements.
We as a nation tended to impliment EU laws at the highest end of any sliding implimentation scale offered.

One such area was the Working Time Directive (Remember that?)
Our nearest(and most relevant) neighbour availed of every opt-out and derogation possible whilst we went for full acceptance and implimentation.

Now,however following some deft Politico/Legal manouvereing we are left with a WTD directive which has to be totally redrafted to a far less strict mode catching Ireland Inc out on a limb as we had gone galloping off to amend every area of our labour law to suit the now defunct original WTD.

The current Worldwide economic collapse is bringing the focus very tightly on to all sorts of otherwise set-in-stone EU regulations and as a result we may see some significant alterations or abandonments there very soon !!! :rolleyes:

antoinolachtnai

Alek,

We do not have an opt-out from the directive in question. Comparing it to treaty provisions where other people have opt-outs is not very illuminating.

This issue of bus subsidies has already been the European Court of Justice and has resulted in the Altmark decision. The new directive puts a framework around Altmark, rather than removing it. I would be surprised if you could find a legal opinion to the effect that the directive is likely to be overturned by the ECJ.

The DTA Act implements the directive and the decision at very much the bottom end of the sliding scale.

In some respects, the Altmark decision (which was made five years ago) is much tougher than the directive as written. The department of transport is already pretty clearly in breach of Altmark as it pertains to CIE.

The 'well, European law, it's all a matter of interpretation really' line isn't really going to fly here.

I don't see the connection between an economic downturn and postponing the idea that the taxpayer should purchase public transport services at market rates.

There is a simple way to avoid the PSO contract situation altogether but it is unlikely to be accepted by Dublin Bus. I presume it has already been discussed.

AlekSmart

I have little doubt but that if I were to offer a large enough retainer I could accquire a Legal Opinion to agree with just about anything I can dream up...just as many other far more exalted than I have done many times

It will be an interesting to see what degree of priority,if any,the Government now decides to allocate to the DTA/CTR.

There may well be a watering down process in train (!) especially in the light of fairly substantial start-up costs.

As for the "interpretation" of EU law not going to fly here,well mabye so,but I`m not so confident of the determination factor of the native Irish administrator.

In the meantime,irrespective of the Public/Private in fighting,the present emergency policy seems destined to ensure that NO real public Bus Service improvements are envisaged until 2015 at the earliest..

antoinolachtnai

On the contrary, the process should yield substantial yearly savings.

AlekSmart

Or as a Politician (or Civil Servant) might say....."Has the Potential to yield substantial yearly savings".

Mr Madoff in the USA probably used similiar prose to sell his South Sea Bubble too

antoinolachtnai

You are being understandably facietious, but I am not. The PSO contract has to be operated at a commercial rate. This should be at least 20 percent less than what Dublin Bus is currently incurring for operating these services (which is around 300,000 per bus per year on a full schedule, 200,000 for a peak-only bus).

AlekSmart

Apologies for what you take as facietiousness .

My own opinion is that world events have taken a course not necessarily to our advantage and as a result of that most if not all of our national governance is now on-hold.

As a result of this and the all too obvious vacuum now existing at Government level I believe we shall see very little if any change in the Public Transport Status Quo this year.

I further believe that the financial aspect of the PSO`s may yet be open to further modification as will much else surrounding our ongoing relationship with matters EU.

In the meantime it`s sit and wait for Dr Lynch`s plan to be revealed