Transport 21 is finally officially dead

strassenwo!f

So we had all the platform for change documents and other mumbo jumbo for the DTO, then we had the transport 21 hype, and so on.

Over the last few years the most significant transport infrastructure put in place in Dublin has been Luas extensions through areas of low population, principally because the previous government was afraid to "cause disruption" in areas of higher density, but at the same time wanted to be seen to do "something".

And - I was in Dublin for the last couple of weeks when it hit home - there is now (to the best of my knowledge) no Luas construction happening in Dublin, nor will there be for at least another couple of years. So much for the rollout of Martin Cullen's "world-class" transport network.

Obviously there's a shortage of cash, but to reach a situation where a lot of Luas construction experience will be (or has been) lost because nothing is being built is very poor.:mad:

Zebra3

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Obviously there's a shortage of cash, but to reach a situation where a lot of Luas construction experience will be (or has been) lost because nothing is being built is very poor.:mad:

There is not a shortage of cash.

This month alone the FG/Lab government gave away €4.3Bn of our money to private gamblers. :mad::mad::mad:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/gene-kerrigan/gene-kerrigan-hooray-were-back-on-track-again-2873035.html

And this month alone, Enda Kenny's Government will pay a total of €4.3bn (€4,299,705,436, to be exact) to similar gamblers -- at the insistence of the IMF/EU. The Government will borrow that money and shortly afterwards Mr Noonan will bring in a Budget that will seek to save up to €4bn in cuts and tax increases.

Wild Bill

Yeah. Just imagine what €4.3 billion could do - MN or DU (and add several Luas lines to either) :mad::mad:

Or it would complete ALL the roads now abandoned from T21, with lots left over.

And so on....while trainspotters here on boards haggle about whether a road should be a 2+1 or a 2+2 in order to save some loose change!

Or, golly gosh, was there really a need for such a high spec on the M8, etc.

And in the blink of an eye (no debate, EIAs, public consultations, planning process, "sustainability" concerns) FG/Lab not only implement FF's crazy bailing out of banker's gambling debts but add another €4.3 billion to our collective debt while abandoning virtually all infrastructure projects.

You couldn't make it up.

strassenwo!f

Zebra3 wrote: »

There is not a shortage of cash.

This month alone the FG/Lab government gave away €4.3Bn of our money to private gamblers. :mad::mad::mad:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/gene-kerrigan/gene-kerrigan-hooray-were-back-on-track-again-2873035.html

This is obviously a big cost to Ireland, having to pay out all this money. It is a colossal amount of money, which should be available to develop the country.

Unfortunately, the bright sparks in the Dept. of Finance - from what I've been told the very brightest of the civil service intake go into the Dept. of Finance and the Dept. of Foreign Affairs - never noticed that there was overheating in the Irish property sector. So all the banks were lending out all this money, and the Central Bank and the Dept of Finance didn't see any major problem. Bright and all as they are, the whizzkids in the DoF saw no problem, or at the very worst, saw only a soft landing.

Unfortunately there was a problem, and with the FF bank guarantee and so forth, the money needs to be repaid. So there's no obvious spare cash.

OK, obviously, the people employed by the Department of Transport aren't the whizzkids (not necessarily a disparagement given the performance of the folks in Finance), but it is not unreasonable to expect that there might have been some major project in Dublin over the last five years; something more than just an extension of a Luas line to the point or to citywest. (Has significant development happened on any other line since the original two Luas lines opened. Not as far as I am aware.)

However, to reach a situation where there is no development of any Luas line taking place, or even any proposed development which will definitively take place in the next year or two, is very poor. Martin Cullen told us that there would be a world-class transport system developed in Dublin over the subsequent ten years. Now that was obviously his usual BS even at the time, but to see no progress towards that is still very depressing.

LXFlyer

I don't think you are being fair here - there is investment in the main form of public transport in Dublin - the bus network.

The rollout of the AVLC system to control the Dublin Bus network was completed this year, the RTPI is now about to be rolled out online and text, with the onstreet rollout continuing, and the Network Direct project is ongoing with the network and the timetables undergoing a massive overhaul. Add to that the ongoing testing of the multi-mode smartcard which should be appearing in a few months once the testing issues are ironed out.

That is all good progress and relatively cheap too.

Zebra3

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Unfortunately there was a problem, and with the FF bank guarantee and so forth, the money needs to be repaid.

Read the article.

The money does not have to be "repaid".

(You do not have to repay gamblers who lose).

This has nothing to do with FF/Greens sell-out.

Pete_Cavan

Zebra3 wrote: »

There is not a shortage of cash.

This month alone the FG/Lab government gave away €4.3Bn of our money to private gamblers. :mad::mad::mad:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/gene-kerrigan/gene-kerrigan-hooray-were-back-on-track-again-2873035.html

And this month alone, Enda Kenny's Government will pay a total of €4.3bn (€4,299,705,436, to be exact) to similar gamblers -- at the insistence of the IMF/EU. The Government will borrow that money and shortly afterwards Mr Noonan will bring in a Budget that will seek to save up to €4bn in cuts and tax increases.

The important part of what you quoted from that article is "at the insistence of the IMF/EU". We are getting the money on condition that we dont force any involuntary haircuts on bondholders. Its not like we can spend that €4.3bn on whatever we like.

Wild Bill

The additional €4.3 billion was not, as I understand it, part of the IMF/ECB bailout of the German banking system. So regardless of what they insist a Government with any balls, or any respect for their electoral mandate, would tell the ECB to take a hike.

What can they do?

Drive us into default and collapse the European banking systen, the euro and possibly the EU itself.

Bring it on! :mad:

dowlingm

I take issue with the representation of senior bondholders in Irish banks as "gamblers". The original investors would have accepted the Irish government's representation as an EU and Eurozone member that they were properly regulating the banks, the Bank Regulator's assurances that the banks were solvent and operating properly and the rating agencies that those assurances were credible ones.

The fact that an Irish bank collapsed on their watch due to grossly irresponsible lending should have caused the instant resignations of Cowen (as previous FinMin) and Lenihan - it was something that should simply not have been possible. Their continuance in office, their failure to get Anglo liquidated quickly in order to "save the herd" has creamed the national credit rating and thereby any possibility of continued PPP activity.

Now - some gamblers DO hold Irish seniors, but they didn't buy them at issue, but rather when the shellshocked pension funds and others opted to cut their losses, and no doubt some of those were listening to people now in government then in opposition who advocated burning these self same seniors in order that the national piggy bank (aka NPRF) go to infrastructure. Now the gamblers will be paid in full, there's no piggy bank, nobody wants to PPP and no infrastructure.

The only questions that remain are whether the Metro North bidders will be compensated for their spending to date. My theory on MN was that the government would have cancelled a couple of years ago but they were hoping the consortia would bail first and thus relieve them of any termination compensation.

Wild Bill

dowlingm wrote: »

I take issue with the representation of senior bondholders in Irish banks as "gamblers".

Sorry, gamblers they were. As are any investors in the capitalist system. The notion that the Irish citizen owes them anything is absurd.

These absurdly highly paid German/Euro bankers invested in Irish property (indirectly) in order to reap the rewards of high returns.

If such enterprises go belly-up, the "risk" takers take the hit.

Not the Irish citizen. :mad:

dowlingm

Wild Bill

by that measure, anything short of hiding money under the bed is gambling.

Zebra3

dowlingm wrote: »

I take issue with the representation of senior bondholders in Irish banks as "gamblers". The original investors would have accepted the Irish government's representation as an EU and Eurozone member that they were properly regulating the banks, the Bank Regulator's assurances that the banks were solvent and operating properly and the rating agencies that those assurances were credible ones.

Do you honestly think these people gambled their billions with private Irish institutions without knowing the way they were run?

It wasn't exactly a state secret. :rolleyes:

Wild Bill

dowlingm wrote: »

Wild Bill

by that measure, anything short of hiding money under the bed is gambling.

Money invested in expectation of a return; that is always gambling. Putting your money in the Post Office (used to be) considered very low risk so it paid very low returns. It was a gamble, even if the risk of loss was perceived as almost zero.

That's why people take their cash out from the mattresses and invest - to make a profit; the greater the profit the greater the risk - it's how the capitalist system works!

The Germans didn't leave their cash in their bank vaults because they wanted to make more money; but any investment risks being lost and bankers, of all people, understand that! - the interest paid reflects the degree of risk the investor is prepared to accept.

It is a bet.

And when you lose a bet on a horse 'cos you backed a 30/1 shot (high risk investment) you don't go demanding the horse-owner covers you loss.

Let alone the taxpayer in a foreign country who was not involved in your gambling.

bk

Just to point out, leaving your money under the mattress is also a gamble.

You are gambling that your house won't be burgled or burn down.

You are also gambling that you won't loose to much value to inflation.

dynamick

Wild Bill wrote: »

The Germans didn't leave their cash in their bank vaults because they wanted to make more money; but any investment risks being lost and bankers, of all people, understand that! - the interest paid reflects the degree of risk the investor is prepared to accept.

five things:
1.The interest on senior irish bank bonds was low : mostly between 2% and 4%
2. The bonds were legally constituted as equal in ranking to deposits - if the banks went bust, the bondholders had an equal rank in the liquidator's queue with small depositors. For this reason the interest rate was equivalent to the amount of interest on a similar deposit.
3. Many of the bonds are secured on various assets. So in the event of non-payment, the bondholder has a legal right to an underlying asset.
4. Bondholders are typically trustees for little people: pension funds and the like.
5. If the state announces that lodging money in an Irish bank is the same as betting on a horse, then expect nobody to ever lodge money in an Irish bank again.

Wild Bill

bk wrote: »

Just to point out, leaving your money under the mattress is also a gamble.

You are gambling that your house won't be burgled or burn down.

You are also gambling that you won't loose to much value to inflation.

Absolutely correct.

And if your house (and hence your matress) burns you don't expect the taxpayers of a foreign county to pick up the tab

Wild Bill

dynamick wrote: »

five things:
1.The interest on senior irish bank bonds was low : mostly between 2% and 4%

Yup. Like the Post Office, they thought the risk was low. It wasn't. Bad bet. Goodbye.

2. The bonds were legally constituted as equal in ranking to deposits - if the banks went bust, the bondholders had an equal rank in the liquidator's queue with small depositors. For this reason the interest rate was equivalent to the amount of interest on a similar deposit.

Interesting no doubt. But what the f**k has that got to do with me, the Irish taxpayer? I'm not a bank.

3. Many of the bonds are secured on various assets. So in the event of non-payment, the bondholder has a legal right to an underlying asset.

Yeah, give them the Anglo-Irish Bank and any assets it owns!

4. Bondholders are typically trustees for little people: pension funds and the like.

Tough. Bring on the violins. The Irish taxpayers are typically little people; the rich don't pay tax. In case you haven't noticed?

5. If the state announces that lodging money in an Irish bank is the same as betting on a horse, then expect nobody to ever lodge money in an Irish bank again.

Over 300 US banks have collapsed in the past 3 years; and still the world invests in the rest - so that argument is 24 carat bull. :mad:

Guys, the defence here of the bail-out scam is one of the most intellectually challenged and economically illiterate boll*x I've heard.

And that's in the face of some very stiff competition