Public transport struggling -> government cuts

Art(h)ur

First you learn this:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dublin-one-of-the-worst-capitals-in-europe-for-transport-1968104.html
Less than 20% of Dubliners commute using public transport?! Should that not be the ultimate proof of the cr*ppy quality on offer? It's like an in-the-face customer feedback telling CIE bosses they're doing an unbelievably bad job. In any company that would result in a major shake up but not in the state-owned one, obviously.
However, if this figure is true than why are all commuter trains so crowded? I'd say it shows there's not enough of them - a 15-minute peak frequency is definitely a joke for a 1m+ city.
On the other hand - I think it's a bit of a vicious circle: people are annoyed with what's there, so they don't use it, so the numbers (and income) are low, so there's little investment ('what's the point if people are not using it?'), so the offer is not improving, so people are not attracted etc. There certainly seem to be some negative attitude to using a bus/train instead of taxi/own car - it is justified but still if there was some believe out there, it might improve things a bit (higher demand usually leads to better service in the long run).
But the next day you see this:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/public-transport-hit-with-836427m-cut-in-funding-1969542.html
So what is now the government doing? Reducing the spending on public transport, obviously. But what really got me raging is that twice as much will be spent on roads - twice as much! I'm not trying to be anti-road here but isn't the government clearly anti-public transport here? Shouldn't it be roughly half/half? I'm not even mentioning the obvious difference in cost: after building the permanent way you have to buy the actual trains and carriages - there's no equivalent spending with the roads.
This is going nowhere...

AlekSmart

This is going nowhere...

Not exactly Arthur,let us just suppose that you are a senior Political figure who just happens to have a ...hmmm,let me see now.....close and cordial relationship with some frightfully efficient and forward thinking Toll Collection companies.

Now...if we can somehow manage to divert or stall some of this dreadful Public Transport provision,which,if successful could negatively impact on projected usage figures for Toll Facilities....will this not be a good days work ?

Following on from the success of this strategy the only place one can go is up...or perhaps to somewhere nice and warm and dry......the South of France springs to mind.....

spareman

AlekSmart wrote: »

Not exactly Arthur,let us just suppose that you are a senior Political figure who just happens to have a ...hmmm,let me see now.....close and cordial relationship with some frightfully efficient and forward thinking Toll Collection companies.

You just have to look at the Revenue protecting ilegal turns onto and off Dublin's newest bridge to realise who calls the shots in this country of ours.
Not being allowed to turn left while traveling towards the city on the north quays is a scandal.

mikemac

spareman wrote: »

Not being allowed to turn left while traveling towards the city on the north quays is a scandal.

Yep, I heard of this today.
You have to go all the way to Matt Talbot bridge and then return back on the South Quays. And I thought one of the aims of this fantastic (and it does look fantastic ) bridge was to take congestion away from the city centre.

I can understand in some area right turns need to be restricted. But this is a left turn that reduces congestion and I just can't get it at all.

Why one would almost say people would use the East Link to avoid all this hassle and just pay the toll.

dowlingm

Art(h)ur wrote: »

what really got me raging is that twice as much will be spent on roads - twice as much!

1. Public transport gains virtually no votes in rural constituencies where there is virtually no public transport but where local road building is a critical political topic.
2. 2:1 ratio actually sounds pretty good - didn't it use to be a lot worse?
3. The good news in that post is that PSOs to the regional airports are going to come under pressure. If the PSO money to NOC, GWY and SXL was given to IE ringfenced to specified frequency/capacity improvements west of Portarlington and Maynooth I reckon you could do quite a bit.

Am a bit puzzled by spareman's reference to the Revenue in his post?

jrar

mikemac wrote: »

Yep, I heard of this today.
You have to go all the way to Matt Talbot bridge and then return back on the South Quays. And I thought one of the aims of this fantastic (and it does look fantastic ) bridge was to take congestion away from the city centre.

I can understand in some area right turns need to be restricted. But this is a left turn that reduces congestion and I just can't get it at all.

Why one would almost say people would use the East Link to avoid all this hassle and just pay the toll.

Not sure why, but these operating restrictions were part of the planning approval provisos when An Bord Pleanala gave the project their "blessing"

Art(h)ur

dowlingm wrote: »

1. Public transport gains virtually no votes in rural constituencies where there is virtually no public transport but where local road building is a critical political topic.

That's another vicious circle - with current attitude roads will always be more important and nothing will ever change. The simple way out of it is to start providing public transport there - then those constituencies will start to care about the quality of service they get and put the pressure on their local politicians to improve it. Surprisingly, boards' readers are able to grasp that idea but the decision-makers are not.
BTW - isn't it the role of the central government to make decisions based on the country's best interest, not simply fulfilling the requests of each town and village? (a rhetorical question, I know...)

ardmacha

Surprisingly, boards' readers are able to grasp that idea but the decision-makers are not.

Boards readers don't have to balance the budget. If health and education are cut and if social welfare and pay rates are cut then public transport cannot remain immune.

BTW - isn't it the role of the central government to make decisions based on the country's best interest, not simply fulfilling the requests of each town and village? (a rhetorical question, I know...)

The government should serve the people, who live in towns and villages among other places. Some people here believe that the government should herd people into cities and compel them to live in apartments and use buses, this is not the function of a democratic government.

That said public transport policy, like most other Irish government policies, is largely devoid of any underlying principle as to what they want to achieve. Without such a principle it is difficult to argue for any measure.