Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

lods

Absurdum wrote: »

Look, if Kevin says it will cost €5bn, then it will cost €10bn, I'm sure he's done his homework here when he suggests €15bn, there's no way he throw figures like €20bn around if he wasn't certain it would cost €30bn + your firstborn if it weren't true :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

So €40bn it is then ok.

A spokesman for the RPA said it would cost less than 40 billion , but that the exact figure is commercially sensitive

Jack Noble

lods wrote: »

Who says it won't cost 30million :P

If it cost €30million, lods, not even you or Myarse could object to that, could you?;)

lods

Jack Noble wrote: »

If it cost €30million, lods, not even you or Myarse could object to that, could you?;)

I could be Kevin Myarse;)

DWCommuter

Jack Noble wrote: »

DWC

I have no vested interest other than that of a commuter who is sick of being stuck in traffic. I have nothing to do with the RPA or IE or any other State body.

I want to see all the projects built - not simply Metro North. And I pointed out that Coveney's light dismissal re Dart Underground is worrying.

Metro simply cannot meet its potential without Dart Underground, which is the more important of the two projects - something the two of us agree on. Dart is not ready to go and won't be for at least two and probably three years - that is the fault of both IE and the present govt, not the RPA. They have done their job effectively re Metro North, others have not re Dart Underground.

What I posted here yesterday was simply that the transport spokesman of Fine Gael - which all polls suggest will be the largest party in government, if not the sole govt party, in three weeks' time - made an unequivical statement on live national radio in support of Metro North and gave more details on why FG supports the project than he or other FG spokespeople have given to date. (You may want to check the 'Dart Underground delayed' thread as I elaborate on the DU point and why I believe Coveney got a free ride on Metro over Dart yesterday.)

I also pointed out that this directly contradicts what opponents like lods say on this site and is consistent with what I have said here on boards.ie since I joined last year.

Please explain how this makes me some sort of RPA stooge.

Since you've joined Boards you've made circa 46 posts and all of them are Metro related. For a mere "commuter who is sick of being stuck in traffic" you are either a political/RPA/tender plant or somebody who lives and works within 50 metres of a planned MN stop. The latter is unlikely as even somebody in that situation could manage to utilise other aspects of boards.ie.

I stand by my opinion that you are not as unconnected to the MN project as you claim or else you are just a professional troll. I'm not the moderator and its not even a moderation issue, but personally watching you come on here and post about absolutely nothing else is not in the spirit of fair play. Anybody with a semblence of intellect should be able to see that you are a one trick pony on this forum and one trick ponies eventually get found out.

Jack Noble

DWCommuter wrote: »

Since you've joined Boards you've made circa 46 posts and all of them are Metro related. For a mere "commuter who is sick of being stuck in traffic" you are either a political/RPA/tender plant or somebody who lives and works within 50 metres of a planned MN stop. The latter is unlikely as even somebody in that situation could manage to utilise other aspects of boards.ie.

I have also posted on Dart Underground and 100 per cent support it. If it was the other way around and Dart was ready to go in a PPP and Metro was running late due to RPA/Govt dithering and dawdling, I would be supporting DartU going ahead now, with Metro to follow ASAP.

I have also said on the Dart thread that I would have preferred to see the original DRRTS/Dart plan resurrected and updated in the 1990s and delivered in the last decade instead of this slow-burning hotch-potch of Luas/Metro/Dart lines that we now have.

I live nowhere near the Metro North route but I hope to be able to use it when it is operational to get to Croker and the airport. I actually live on the Red Luas line and will also benefit from DartU when it is built.

I stand by my opinion that you are not as unconnected to the MN project as you claim or else you are just a professional troll. I'm not the moderator and its not even a moderation issue, but personally watching you come on here and post about absolutely nothing else is not in the spirit of fair play. Anybody with a semblence of intellect should be able to see that you are a one trick pony on this forum and one trick ponies eventually get found out.

I have nothing whatsoever to do with the RPA, NTA, DTO, DoT, or any company involved in either Metro bidding consortium. And I particularly resent you calling me a troll.

I have posted on Metro and Dart equally as they are the two projects I want to see built ASAP because I believe both will benefit the city.

Two days ago I posted the same post on this thread and the DU delayed thread about Simon Coveney's comments re Metro and Dart in which he said FG where committed to Metro but appeared to back away from Dart. And I said I found that part worrying.

Today I posted Kevin Myers's latest comments in the Indo in which he once again went way over the top in his criticism of Metro North and threw in the utterly ridiculous prediction that it could end up costing €30billion.

How is that trolling?

You may not support Metro North but many of us do - there is no need to dish out petty insults and boorish attacks on those who disagree with you. It is something I expect on Politics.ie but I expected a higher standard of debate on Boards.ie.

I also support Dart - should I now take your approach and lash out at those here who disagree with it and me?

I am not going to get into a war of words with you here, DWCommuter, but I will simply say that for someone who has done so much to put Dart Underground on the agenda, your attacks on supporters of Metro simply denigrate your own hard work and reflect more poorly on you than they do on me or others here.

EDIT: Looking back over my posts on the Dart Underground Delayed thread, I find you telling me you generally agree with me - twice.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055630770&page=52

What has changed suddenly in the last few days that now has you launching such attacks on me?

DWCommuter

Jack Noble wrote: »

And I particularly resent you calling me a troll.

I said professional troll. The evidence is there as you post about nothing else bar MN or DU where it relates to MN.

You may not support Metro North but many of us do - there is no need to dish out petty insults and boorish attacks on those who disagree with you. It is something I expect on Politics.ie but I expected a higher standard of debate on Boards.ie.

I never said I didn't support it and I haven't insulted anyone. I don't attack anyone here who disagrees with me. I just state my views. You do all the insulting. Check the threads. I giving you debate Jack. My current position is that you do actually have some kind of vested interest in MN. Iv'e put forward the evidence.

I also support Dart - should I now take your approach and lash out at those here who disagree with it and me?

Once again, where do I not support the concept of MN? And your remark about me "lashing" out at those who disagree with me is based on what posts on this particular forum?

I am not going to get into a war of words with you here, DWCommuter, but I will simply say that for someone who has done so much to put Dart Underground on the agenda, your attacks on supporters of Metro simply denigrate your own hard work and reflect more poorly on you than they do on me or others here.

Brilliant Jack! An attempt to discredit me by telling absolute lies. I haven't attacked any supporters of MN and if my opinions on the project, the politics and the RPA, are deemed as attacks, then obviously you are not capable of debating anything. Let me put you in the picture about my "work" as you put it.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1019/metro.html?rss

Not much of an anti Metro North stance there Jack. (and I offer up my real identity yet again.)

Bottom line. I have no agenda. I support whats worth supporting as long as its the finished article. MN and DU is the finished article. My problem with you is that you are far too pro MN (with a few nods to DU) and talk about nothing else. Dublins public transport is about more than just MN and even DU. Your Metro only related posts stink in my opinion of someone who has an agenda.

I don't believe you and Im just trying to protect the integrity of other posters here who post about all sorts of stuff all over boards. I've been around the block with CIE and the RPA. I know how it works.

DWCommuter

What has changed suddenly in the last few days that now has you launching such attacks on me?

Don't play the victim with me Jack. It doesn't work. My very first post to you mentioned your possible association with the RPA. Since then, I have held my silence and simply agreed with you on points that I... well...agreed on! That's allowed.

In general though, I believe you are a plant, self made or otherwise. Your entire posting history is too focused. So I reiterate my point that I'm saying this in the interest of other posters and their integrity.

Jack Noble

Reading the Indo report today on a Green Party press conference yesterday, I couldn't help but wonder: have the Greens let slip the intial cost to the State of Metro North?

We know the State has to pay for enabling works and the NTA said that will be €250million in 2011 and 2012. Under the PPP, the State will have to make 'implementation payments' towards the capital cost of the construction contract but we have never been told how much that will be - commerical sensitivity re the PPP tenders being cited by the RPA as the reason the exact cost is being withheld.

From this morning's Indo report on the Greens:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/greens-clear-on-tax-hikes-but-vague-on-spending-cuts-2533430.html

Capital spending will be cut by €1.75bn -- a reasonable figure in line with other parties -- but again the party is coy about where the knife will fall.
The party is more specific about what it will keep; singling out the €700m Metro North project and a €600m programme to finance better insulation in homes.

That's quite a specific figure and I doubt very much the reporter concerned plucked it out of the air.

Now, it makes me ask the questions:

Have the Greens inadvertently revealed the cost to the State of Metro North over the next four years?

If so, is that the total cost, including the amount spent to date (circa €140m) and the enabling works (€250m) plus the contribution towards the PPP - which will this be €310m?

Or does it just include just the enabling works so the State contributes €450m towards the PPP?

Or is this additional to the enabling works so the State contributes €700m?

I would tend to lean towards the €450m figure as the total cost of Metro is included in the four-year plan agreed with the IMF/EU.

That puts the PPP element at a cost of some €1.6billion to €1.8bn based on the €2.5bn figure leaked to the Indo in Sept 2010 and the €700m cost mentioned in the above report on the Green press conference yesterday.

However, that could rise to up to €2.3bn for the PPP based on higher €3bn mentioned by the Greens' Ciaran Cuffe during the debate with Simon Coveney on Today FM on Monday evening that I flagged above. He actually said between €2.5bn and €3bn.

I think this may be an unintended leak by the Greens as they would have the figures on the cost of Metro North from Ryan and Gormley being at the Cabinent table and Cuffe's role as a junior minister in Transport. I could also be a very deliberate leak to get the figure out there to show that Metro could be affordable to the State under the PPP model.

The other possibilities are:

The Indo did pluck the figure out of the air - which is unlikely.

The Greens have got their figures wrong - evens odds on that.

Building costs have fallen so much Metro North will now cost €700m - not a chance.

I also wonder how senior RPA officials reacted when they read the Indo over their morning coffees today?

Just throwing it out there to see what others think because it certainly struck me as very odd to see that figure this morning - especially in the context it was reported.

dynamick

This is my reading:
spent to date: 140m
enabling works 2011-2012: 250m
Total capital 2011-2014: 700m
so 2013-2014 require: 700-250 = 450m
EIB loan: 500m
Total so far:500+700+140 = 1340

Project total cost: 2500m to 3000m
Amount to fund through a PPP: 1160m - 1660m

Now, these days it seems that about 1bn is the most you can get finance for a PPP. And the rate that the PPP pays interest is linked with the credit rating of the governmnet making the payments. So that's a problem as our bond rates are at 9% and need to fall somehow.

Zebra3

If anyone has leaked info pertaining to a sensitive project like MN, they should be subject to a criminal investigation by the guards.

BrianD

Zebra3 wrote: »

If anyone has leaked info pertaining to a sensitive project like MN, they should be subject to a criminal investigation by the guards.

Nonsense. It's a building project like any other that the Government undertake.

It's not "commercially sensitive" as other posters claim. There's only a few qualified organisations that can tender for this kind of work and all would have a ball park figure. The reason why it's sensitive for the RPA is probably they haven't got a balls what it really would really cost given that they have no experience in these matters. I don't envy them as probably the only people they can get true advice from our the folks who undertake these projects.

As for the €700m in the Greens report, I think even the most optimistic MN supporter would agree that this is on the low side especially when you compare it with the cost of recent tram line extensions.

NuMarvel

I think it's been misreported more than anything else. Looking at the Green's Better Budgeting policy document on Public Finances shows that they say:

We will also draw down €1 billion from the National Pension Reserve Fund to intensify and accelerate investment in the National Retrofit Programme and in public transport projects. €300 million will be drawn down and added to the existing Retrofit budget so that €200 million will be invested in the project each year over the next three years. The remaining €700 million will be
invested in the construction of the Metro North, which will start creating construction and immediately as well as developing a critical piece of our capital’s 21st century transport system.
Fourth page of this document.

Not quite the same as saying that the project will cost €700 million, but I'm not sure what the benefit of investing more money into a PPP. In general terms, isn't the idea of Public/Private Partnerships that the private sector invests most of the money first, with the State paying after completion?

Jack Noble

NuMarvel wrote: »

I think it's been misreported more than anything else. Looking at the Green's Better Budgeting policy document on Public Finances shows that they say:

We will also draw down €1 billion from the National Pension Reserve Fund to intensify and accelerate investment in the National Retrofit Programme and in public transport projects. €300 million will be drawn down and added to the existing Retrofit budget so that €200 million will be invested in the project each year over the next three years. The remaining €700 million will be
invested in the construction of the Metro North, which will start creating construction and immediately as well as developing a critical piece of our capital’s 21st century transport system.
Fourth page of this document.

Not quite the same as saying that the project will cost €700 million, but I'm not sure what the benefit of investing more money into a PPP. In general terms, isn't the idea of Public/Private Partnerships that the private sector invests most of the money first, with the State paying after completion?

That figure of €700m is very specific. The questions I have to ask - given the secrecy of the RPA surrounding the Metro North project - is how the Green can be so specific and why they have chosen to publicise it now?

No other party has given a detailed figure of how much will be invested in Metro North between 2011 and 2014. Fianna Fail certainly hasn't - and like the Greens, former ministers have access to the exact figures relating to the project.

How come the Greens are able to give such a specific figure? And why give such a specific figure in the first place?

jd

Labour manifesto here

http://www.labour.ie/download/pdf/labour_election_manifesto_2011.pdf

All planned transport infrastructure
projects, including Public-Private
Partnerships, will be subject to a
cost benefit analysis. Based on this
analysis, investment in transport
infrastructure that provides the best
value for money, and that reduces
carbon emissions from transport,
will be prioritised

However

Labour will also
explore the development of the Bus Rapid Transit model in our cities,
which can replicate the speed and
comfort of light rail at a fraction of
the cost

I suppose it all depends on the final tenders!

etchyed

jd wrote: »

Labour manifesto here

http://www.labour.ie/download/pdf/labour_election_manifesto_2011.pdf

Reading between the (not so subtle) lines, the Labour manifesto is a big fat NO to Metro North.

monument

Labour will also explore the development of the Bus Rapid Transit model in our cities, which can replicate the speed and comfort of light rail at a fraction of the cost

Rolling around on the floor laughing is the only response that can be given to anybody who seriously thinks that Labour or FG will introduce proper BRT or on surface Luas along roads which run near Metro North. You're fooling your self.

There's an idealistic part of the Labour Party, there's a lot in-between and then there's a very pro car and/or very pro anybody who shouts a lot (ie motorists and residents along the route of any BRT in north city and county Dublin. It's around the same or worst with FF, FG, and SF, so this is not a dig at Labour.

Jervis

Don't the NTA do cost-benefit analysis already and assess what should be prioritised, including BRT alternatives? As the entity who is responsible for the strategic planning of transport surely they should be ones defending the need for schemes such as Metro North (rather than RPA who are simply the implementing body). Yet they seem remarkably quiet other than publishing the business case for MN on their website.

lods

Interesting FG have in their manifesto to merge the NRA and RPA , I think McCarty recomended that . Considering the RPA tag line is to "get people off roads and onto rails ", hard to see how this would work . The RPA are mostly ex Irish Rail , I fail to see how this will work for either group, neither would appear to know much about the others work

monument

Jervis wrote: »

Don't the NTA do cost-benefit analysis already and assess what should be prioritised, including BRT alternatives? As the entity who is responsible for the strategic planning of transport surely they should be ones defending the need for schemes such as Metro North (rather than RPA who are simply the implementing body). Yet they seem remarkably quiet other than publishing the business case for MN on their website.

As long as a tender comes in at a reasonable price and funding can be secured, Metro North is a done deal. Lot's of people on both for and against it don't seem to be getting this.

The NTA are looking at future planning, but Metro North is already advanced in the pipeline and ready to go. And it already has an agency looking after it and to defend it.

lods wrote: »

Interesting FG have in their manifesto to merge the NRA and RPA , I think McCarty recomended that . Considering the RPA tag line is to "get people off roads and onto rails ", hard to see how this would work . The RPA are mostly ex Irish Rail , I fail to see how this will work for either group, neither would appear to know much about the others work

The NTA is to take over the policy role anyway, the process is already being advanced -- It will not just neuter the NRA and NTA, but also councils and any other authority which gets in its way. Unlike the DTO, the NTA's policies will have real meaning, ie legal meaning and power. It will override development plans and it is already acting as the funding agency for good deal of capital and ongoing spending.

Jack Noble

I posted this on the 'Luas/BRT alternative to Metro North' thread in response to Brian D but I feel it's just as relevant here as the same discussion seems to be going on on both threads.

I wouldn't take too much solace from the Labour manifesto and the lack of mention of Metro North, if I were you.

The lack of a clear commitment either way on Metro and the deliberate mention clear cost benefit analysis is a compromise/fudge to cover deep divisions in the party in Dublin over Metro North. This stems from Gilmore's 'shove back' comments last autumn on Marian Finucane's radio show and a few days later in an interview in the Herald. Those comments caught a lot of people in Labour cold and there was a public row back a few days later.

There are a number of very strong supporters of Metro in Labour, the most important of which are Joan Burton, Ruairi Quinn and Tommy Broughan. Roisin Shorthall also supports the project but publicly has taken the Gilmore line. Burton described Metro as a 'no brainer', Broughan is a longtime supporter and the party's former transport spokesman and Quinn told Morning Ireland last October that fact the PPP could be paid back over 25 years made the project affordable. Burton and Broughan have both received detailed briefings on the project from the RPA and are familiar with the figures and the true costs to the State. Burton described the project as 'revenue neutral' for the taxpayer during construction. Obviously, the constituencies of all four are served by Metro North and they are conscious of the job creation prospects associated with the project, both during construction and once the line is operational.

Opponents include Gilmore and transport spokesman Joe Costello. Neither have been briefed on the project to the extent of Burton and Broughan and Costello's comments on Metro have been all over the place. He has shown himself to be clueless on his brief. His NIMBY posturing in opposition to Dart Underground have also shown him up badly.

Pat Rabbitte is neutral - he supports building Metro but is deeply sceptical and suspicious of the PPP approach. He won't commit either way until he see the detailed figures. If there is a high cost to the State, then he favours delaying construction until the State can afford it. However, Rabbitte last summer told his local paper in Tallaght that he favours building Metro West now because he sees it as a more important project than Metro North - go figure!!!

Labour's manifesto is simply recognition of that divide and gives the party a 'get out' clause - detailed cost benefit analysis - either way. If the PPP and CBA costs are favourable, the project goes ahead. If not, it will be 'shoved back', as Gilmore said.

Fine Gael this week gave unequivical support to the project when transport spokesman Simon Coveney backed it on Today FM. He specifically stated the business case was favourable and the PPP made it attractive as it would be paid back over 25 years.

Like Labour, there are powerful supporters within the party - the most prominent being James Reilly and Leo Varadkar, both of whom represent constituencies served by Metro. Reilly has been able to convince Enda Kenny to support the project. He also has received a similar, detailed RPA briefing to Burton and Broughan. That was last summer and he was accompanied by Michael Noonan. They also have the figures on the project. Paschal Donohoe, the FG candidate in Dublin Central also supports the project.

The most prominent opponent/sceptic in FG is Richard Bruton - who is simply not convinced of the need for the project or whether it is affordable, either now or ever. He shares the same view of Metro/Dart as anti-rail economists like Colm McCarthy and Sean Barrett.

When FG and Labour are in government, they will receive detailed briefings on the project from officials in Finance, Transport and the RPA and will be made aware of the costs very early on. They will also be briefed by officials from Enterprise, Trade and Employments, the IDA, and Dublin City and Fingal councils on how important they view the project is to their job creation and growth strategies. And, no doubt they will be lobbied by private sector supporters and opponents of the project.

But any final decision on whether to proceed with or delay or cancel Metro North will be made based on the final cost of the PPP when the BAFOs are submitted this summer and a winning tender selected and whether the updated CBA is favourable. That decision will be based on cold, hard analysis of the figures, probably in consulation with the IMF/EU and nothing else - emotions and passions of supporters and opponents simply won't come into it.

I am a supporter of Metro North, Dart Underground and the various other Metro and Luas projects and I make no bones about it on this site, on P.ie and to people I talk to.

However, the above analysis is based on my discussions in recent months - both before and after the election was called - with politicians of all parties. Sinn Fein also supported proceeding with Metro and Dart - despite Mary Lou's Costello-esque NIMBY antics in Dublin Central. Fianna Fail also support the project but, like SF, will be nowhere near government to be able to make the decision.

In my view, based on those discussions, Metro is very much still alive and still in play and will remain so until a final decision has to be made later this year. And that decision will be based on the numbers alone. If it's a good deal for the State, it will go ahead. If the PPP is too expensive in the short or long-term, then it won't. It's that simple.

It's up to posters here whether they accept my analysis or not.

BrianD

monument wrote: »

As long as a tender comes in at a reasonable price and funding can be secured, Metro North is a done deal. Lot's of people on both for and against it don't seem to be getting this.

The NTA are looking at future planning, but Metro North is already advanced in the pipeline and ready to go. And it already has an agency looking after it and to defend it.

Done deal? The next government that takes office can still turn around and cancel it. All were out of pocket for is the route preparation works.

Jack Noble

BrianD wrote: »

Done deal? The next government that takes office can still turn around and cancel it. All were out of pocket for is the route preparation works.

Wishful thinking on your part Brian. Metro North is included in the 2011-2014 four-year budget plan. That figure may be €700m, including enabling works and the State contribution to the PPP - based on that specific figure released this week in a Green Party policy document.

No decision will be made until the BAFOs have been submitted and the CBA updated. And, as I said above, the decision will be based on those figures alone. If they are favourable, Metro will go ahead as planned - if they are not then it will be shelved until the State finances improve. It is that simple.

Based on the RedC poll in tomorrow's Sunday Business Post and released tonight, with FG up 3 on 38% and Labour down 2 to 20%, Labour may not even be in government next month to influence the decision on Metro North or any other policy. FG are close to overall majority territory here and appear to have momentum behind them going into the last two weeks of the campaign. And Simon Coveney cleared stated FG support for Metro North earlier this week on national radio - pending the final PPP tender price and CBA based on that.

monument

BrianD wrote: »

Done deal? The next government that takes office can still turn around and cancel it. All were out of pocket for is the route preparation works.

Yeah, once the tender prices come in reasonably and the funding is doable.

As above there isn't any major political opposition to the project. All the major and a few of the minor parties support it, the Dublin councils support it, business and retailer groups support it, DCU supports it etc etc.

There's a lot of people with what looks to be wishful thinking. We were told it would not get past ABP, but it looked like it was going to. We were then told the conditions would be so large that it would not go ahead, it's still going ahead. We were told there was problems with the PPP, but there's still two tending for it. And we were told the political opposition is large, but it really does not seem that way.

The opposition is mainly coming from:

• A handful of very localised retailers and other businesses, maybe also a few residents (all mainly being pushed by one retailer).
  
• The "everything goes to Dublin" crowd
  
• "rail is never a good idea" economists and their followers.
  
• A few very vocal media commentators.

There's also people who think the price tag is €15billion, those who think it's an "airport metro" or "airport express", or those who think the whole of St Stephen's Green will be dug up and will never be fixed or grow back. And there's people who never want anything spend on public transport.

The only real difference between this and the Luas is there is there is some notable opposition from some green-thinking people who only want investment in buses. They refuse to engage with the reality of the lack of space on the ground or just want cars banned.

Very little difference to the opposition to the Luas.

DWCommuter

And then there's lil oul me!

I don't believe it will go ahead because the Irish political system doesn't have the stomach for it. History suggests I could be correct. But of course I could be wrong....... We'll see and if I am wrong I'll chew on the humble pie, but if I'm right then I expect plaudits from all of you.:D

Jack Noble

DWCommuter wrote: »

And then there's lil oul me!

I don't believe it will go ahead because the Irish political system doesn't have the stomach for it. History suggests I could be correct. But of course I could be wrong....... We'll see and if I am wrong I'll chew on the humble pie, but if I'm right then I expect plaudits from all of you.:D

There is that element to it, DWC - and it never ceases to amaze me how Irish politicians can FUBAR even the most simple plans.

What has also surprised me in recent months is just how few Dublin politicians actually understand Transport 21, Metro, Dart or even the inadequacies of Luas. Some of those were the same TDs who welcomed Platform for Change back in 2001 and sang the praises of the DTO plan = but now I'm convinced did not really understand the thinking behind it and they just liked the pretty, colourful maps.

However, there is a growing momentum behind Metro and if the PPP price and CBA are favourable, then I expect it to go ahead on schedule. Like Taoiseach Enda Kenny, I think a lot of people are getting used to the idea of Metro North without being over the moon about the prospect.

But your possibility of SNAFU remains....

Zebra3

Jack Noble wrote: »

What has also surprised me in recent months is just how few Dublin politicians actually understand Transport 21, Metro, Dart or even the inadequacies of Luas.

Because they think are far too rich and important to use public transport-it's for the proles.

I can't believe you are surprised. :eek:

lods

The opposition is mainly coming from:
A handful of very localised retailers and other businesses, maybe also a few residents (all mainly being pushed by one retailer).
The "everything goes to Dublin" crowd
"rail is never a good idea" economists and their followers.
A few very vocal media commentato

rs.


I think the attitude of Business in the city centre has changed since the disastrous christmas. I'd expect a lot of the bigger hitters to start becoming more vocal about the effects on trade in the city centre, particularly during the enabling works.

Jack Noble

lods wrote: »

rs.


I think the attitude of Business in the city centre has changed since the disastrous christmas. I'd expect a lot of the bigger hitters to start becoming more vocal about the effects on trade in the city centre, particularly during the enabling works.

The words 'straws' and 'clutching' spring to mind, lods.

Empire o de Sun

How can a city centre business be against something that will make it easier to go to and use town instead of using the many suburban car orientated shopping centres.

lods

Jack Noble wrote: »

The words 'straws' and 'clutching' spring to mind, lods.

We'll see this week Jack, who's clutching at straws