Go-Ahead Dublin City Routes - Updates and Discussion

bebeman

KD345 wrote: »

Jobs are safe, the fleet is increasing and a recruitment drives seems to be on the way.

How many buses are transferring to Go ahead?
How many are to be replaced by the NTA?

bebeman

Stephen15 wrote: »

Well the unions agreed to allow GA in, I doubt they would have if 150 marked in drivers were to become spare. I'm sure they'd be marked in on other D/brook routes or routes in other depot. Out of all DB drivers what percentage are marked in.

Just how powerful do you think the Unions are?
They allowed nothing, the Government/NTA have all the power.
Donnybrook will have 150 spare driver come the end of October, this is a FACT!
Does anyone here think the NTA are going to expand the current routes by 150 drivers?
Off the top of my head the current driver number for 46a and 145 is no more than 100!
So the NTA will create 3 routes out of thin air to equal the current 46a/145 service level!

KD345

bebeman wrote: »

How many buses are transferring to Go ahead?
How many are to be replaced by the NTA?

A total of 60 buses will be taken from the Dublin Bus fleet and transferred to Go Ahead (12 GTs and 48 SGs). These 60 buses will be replaced by 60 new SGs.
Dublin bus will also remove 40 AVs from service this year which will be replaced by 40 new SGs. Go Ahead will also receive a batch of new Streetlites.

In short, Dublin bus will receive 100 new buses this year to replace vehicles being withdrawn and transferred to Go Ahead. These 60 buses will enhance existing routes.

KD345

bebeman wrote: »

Donnybrook will have 150 spare driver come the end of October, this is a FACT!

Donnybrook will be operating roughly the same amount of vehicles as it is at present but just on more frequent existing routes and possibly on routes transferred from other depots.

bebeman wrote: »

Does anyone here think the NTA are going to expand the current routes by 150 drivers?

Yes, this has already started. Over the last 6 months there have been increases to routes like the 15, 25a/b/d, 27, 26, 38, 46a, 66, 67, 70, 140, and 145, and new routes like the 39x and 68x. There are serious capacity problems on the Lucan road, Stillorgan Road and Malahide Road. These areas will most likely be the ones to see increases in routes like the 25d, 46a and 15/27.

There is also a new route planned to meet the Broombridge Luas and connect Finglas. Development along the Docklands will also require extra services in the area in the coming months.

bebeman wrote: »

So the NTA will create 3 routes out of thin air to equal the current 46a/145 service level!

No that won't happen. I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. There will be increases to routes across the network, and as I mentioned earlier, we'll possibly see some routes transfer into Donnybrook. For example, I can see the 14 becoming a fully operated Donnybrook route which would free up space in Summerhill to increase the 16, 41 and 123 if required.

bebeman

KD345 wrote: »

A total of 60 buses will be taken from the Dublin Bus fleet and transferred to Go Ahead . These 60 buses will be replaced by 60 new SGs.
Dublin bus will also remove 40 AVs from service this year which will be replaced by 40 new SGs.
In short, Dublin bus will receive 100 new buses this year to replace vehicles being withdrawn and transferred to Go Ahead. These 60 buses will enhance existing routes.

See the problem?
Same amount of Buses but with less routes.
150 drivers spare
46a and 145 have currently 150 drivers(a guess)
Does anyone here believe Donnybrook will have another 3 routes from scratch that will be the equal to 46a/145?
But, But,But,But routes will transfer over from other depots, What about these routes current drivers?
Rob Peter to pay Paul, no spare driver in Donnybrook, they are on the Donnybrook 39s or 27s, but what about the drivers now spare in the depots the routes where moved from?

bebeman

KD345 wrote: »

Over the last 6 months there have been increases to routes like the 145, .

as a donnybrook driver i can tell you ZERO increase.
What are you on about?

bebeman

KD345 wrote: »

. For example, I can see the 14 becoming a fully operated Donnybrook route which would free up space in Summerhill to increase the 16, 41 and 123 if required.

Cant say for certain, but think only ten 14 operate from summerhill, so we still have 140 spare drivers in donnybrook

KD345

bebeman wrote: »

See the problem?
Same amount of Buses but with less routes.
150 drivers spare
46a and 145 have currently 150 drivers(a guess)
Does anyone here believe Donnybrook will have another 3 routes from scratch that will be the equal to 46a/145?
But, But,But,But routes will transfer over from other depots, What about these routes current drivers?
Rob Peter to pay Paul, no spare driver in Donnybrook, they are on the Donnybrook 39s or 27s, but what about the drivers now spare in the depots the routes where moved from?

You’re missing the bigger picture, there will be new bills drawn up to reflect the increase in service on routes at most depots. For example, there could be 10 buses added to the 46a, 5 buses added to the 7 etc. and drivers who previously operated the 17, 18 etc. will operate these additional duties instead. There will also be new routes, 24 hour routes and drivers retiring who need replacing etc.

Keep in mind, when Bus Connects rolls out in the next year, the route network will change completely. I wouldn’t be getting hung up on routes numbers and depots too much.

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

How many buses are transferring to Go ahead?
How many are to be replaced by the NTA?

All of the buses that are going to Go-Ahead are being replaced.

bebeman wrote: »

Donnybrook will have 150 spare driver come the end of October, this is a FACT! Does anyone here think the NTA are going to expand the current routes by 150 drivers?!

It has been stated numerous times on here and also by the NTA that as routes transfer to Go-Ahead, the staff and vehicles freed up will be redeployed on existing routes. I don't just think that the NTA are going to expand the current routes by redeploying resources, I know it because it has been officially confirmed on a number of occasions since August 2017 and the relevant documents stating this can be found on the NTA website.

The agreement reached following LRC discussions in May 2015 set out that over a 2 to 3 year period there will be sufficient growth to absorb the drivers released from losing the BMO tendered services if Dublin Bus were unsuccessful.

Some new or amended routes are in planning as are opportunities for additional services on existing routes. NTA anticipates the cost of providing these additional routes and services will be largely similar to the current level of activity over a short timeline, certainly within the 2 to 3 years envisaged in the LRC recommendation

We have already been working with Dublin Bus to come up with a plan on increasing the number of services and the frequency of existing services that they run so that in two years’ time, they will be operating a similar level of service as they are now and will be staffed accordingly.

bebeman wrote: »

as a donnybrook driver i can tell you ZERO increase.
What are you on about?

Well many services have had new timetables and peak vehicles requirement increases, the 46A had a new timetable in January and several other Donnybrook routes have had increases as well.

Note that not only were extra timetabled services added, but also running times have been extended on other routes, which meant more buses were needed to deliver the existing timetable and a new timetable for the 145 is currently said to be in the works but subject to being agreed on.

brokenarms

Some of these time table and bill changes only increased the length of the working day for many of the duties. Getting rid of work outs . Leaving less lay time at the end of each run. They did not increase the amount of drivers needed.

Green Party: Ossian Smyth

Go-Ahead was refused permission last week for a bus storage area beside the old Ferry Terminal in Dún Laoghaire Harbour. Permission was denied on the grounds that the planning application for the super-cruise ship dock is still ongoing with An Bord Pleanála, following a judicial review. Go-Ahead has permission for a depot in Ballymount but wanted a location in Dún Laoghaire to store 20 buses over night.

AlekSmart

Bambi wrote: »

We already know what the birth rate is right now so we won't really have hundreds of thousands of new Dubliners by 2040

Unless you mean the idea that shoveling hundreds of thousands of non Dubliners into the city by 2040 is in someway good idea...

Whether "shovelling" hundreds of thousands of "non" Dubliners into Dublin by 2040 is a good idea or not is moot to this thread.

The City is going to develop,preferably in a better planned and catered for way than before,however this is absolutely NOT guaranteed,as can be demonstrated by the sheer incompetence on display in the College Green codology.

I'm assuming Bambi's point is that there will NOT be the scale of incoming populace in the GDR by this 2040 deadline ?

If not,then I presume these people will be allocated to other Urban areas within the State,where they will continue to require the same level of services and stuff,such as Public Transport ?

It's all cyclic,as when I began my career,I would never have thought I would be working in the City Centre with Dublin born colleagues,now commuting daily from Virginia,Carrickmacross,Mullingar,Athlone,Gorey,Enniscorthy,Bunclody etc.

Back then,most depot Staff lived in or near the Depot they worked in,something hugely difficult to ensure today.

So yes,the population dynamic and the predicted shifts,will present both opportunities and challenges,and no doubt,the occasional collapse of reasonable thinking,which we do so well here.

BUT...all that said,If these hundreds and thousands of potential non-Dubliners,of themselves,present a challenge,then Now is the time to start considering one's options......."Last Train out of Dodge" style...?

A good topic perhaps for a different Thread ?

GM228

Green Party: Ossian Smyth wrote: »

Go-Ahead was refused permission last week for a bus storage area beside the old Ferry Terminal in Dún Laoghaire Harbour. Permission was denied on the grounds that the planning application for the super-cruise ship dock is still ongoing with An Bord Pleanála, following a judicial review. Go-Ahead has permission for a depot in Ballymount but wanted a location in Dún Laoghaire to store 20 buses over night.

http://planning.dlrcoco.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=D18A/0091&FromResultID=&FromSortKey=&FromStartIndex=&theTabNo=5&presTypeLetter=R&presCode=ZH&presLang=1

Having regard to the provisions of a concurrent Strategic Infrastructural Development application currently with An Bord Pleanala PL06D.PA0051 for a cruise berth facility, it is considered that the proposed change of use of an existing hardstanding area and ticket office to an overnight bus parking facility with associated staff facilities, directly conflicts with the plans and particulars submitted as part of the proposed cruise berth facility that involves the parking of buses/coaches in the same location as the proposed development. It is therefore considered, that the proposal, as presented has the potential to create a traffic hazard within the site, and, it may prejudice the outcome of, and would be premature pending the determination of a Strategic Infrastructure Development planning application PL06D.PA0051. The proposed development is therefore considered to be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development for the area.

I wonder if there was an alternative site identified as a just in case, if not will there be I wonder or will they scrap the idea altogether?

Green Party: Ossian Smyth

GM228 wrote: »

I wonder if there was an alternative site identified as a just in case, if not will there be I wonder or will they scrap the idea altogether?

I don't believe that they have another site in mind. I expect that they will operate from Ballymount and have to lcope with the inconvenience until the cruise ship planning case is resolved in Dún Laoghaire. They could appeal the decision but I doubt they will.

StreetLight

KD345 wrote: »

You’re missing the bigger picture, there will be new bills drawn up to reflect the increase in service on routes at most depots. For example, there could be 10 buses added to the 46a, 5 buses added to the 7 etc. and drivers who previously operated the 17, 18 etc. will operate these additional duties instead. There will also be new routes, 24 hour routes and drivers retiring who need replacing etc.

Keep in mind, when Bus Connects rolls out in the next year, the route network will change completely. I wouldn’t be getting hung up on routes numbers and depots too much.

Don't forget that the NTA has made no secret of their desire to see Saturday and Sunday services seriously beefed up. So we may see more drivers required to work rosters specifically targeting the weekend.

punisher5112

Green Party: Ossian Smyth wrote: »

I don't believe that they have another site in mind. I expect that they will operate from Ballymount and have to lcope with the inconvenience until the cruise ship planning case is resolved in Dún Laoghaire. They could appeal the decision but I doubt they will.

Plenty of places in Bray and the likes that they could use.

I'm sure they will get somewhere.

AlekSmart

GM228 wrote: »

http://planning.dlrcoco.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=D18A/0091&FromResultID=&FromSortKey=&FromStartIndex=&theTabNo=5&presTypeLetter=R&presCode=ZH&presLang=1

I wonder if there was an alternative site identified as a just in case, if not will there be I wonder or will they scrap the idea altogether?

Personally,I would imagine they will just move on to a different location,particularly as all that is required is overnight hard-standing and basic crew facilities for c.20 vehicles.

The Workplace Travel Plan,which is a requirement of the Planning Process for the Ballymount facility mentions the actual vehicle movements.

http://www.sdublincoco.ie/index.aspx?pageid=6431&regref=SD17A/0428&r=&l=Ballymount&prop=Bus%20Garage&name=

Fair play to Ossian Smyth and the Green Party,for digging a bit deeper into the documentation,as prior to this,the only Publicly Available documentation related to DLRCC's decision,on the 4th January last,to declare the original application Invalid and therefore not consider it at all.

http://planning.dlrcoco.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=D17A/1143&theTabNo=2&backURL=%3Ca%20href=wphappcriteria.display?paSearchKey=2092051%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C/a%3E%20%3E%20%3Ca%20href=%27wphappsearchres.displayResultsURL?ResultID=2439806%26StartIndex=1%26SortOrder=rgndat:desc%26DispResultsAs=WPHAPPSEARCHRES%26BackURL=%3Ca%20href=wphappcriteria.display?paSearchKey=2092051%3ESearch%20Criteria%3C/a%3E%27%3ESearch%20Results%3C/a%3E

Presumably an application was made to ABP in relation to the site,with much speculation locally as to the input of the various Yacht Clubs in the area.

As to the Cruise Liner proposal,I fear this is the reddest of Red Herrings,and will in time be seen as such.
Very little of the Boroughs development has ever been carried out with Public Transport in mind,with the length of time it took to get Mallin Station to it's current state a very obvious indication of where priorities lie in Irish Planning terms.

devnull

Better version of a decker in TFI livery here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/155839993@N04/40297279135/

Dyr

Would look a lot better if the turquoise stripe was white

and they forget to do the wing mirror

dublinman1990

That livery does look very well. It's a good decision that they didn't put the white options for real from the bus livery survey onto the buses otherwise IMO it would have looked terrible. I want to go aside from the livery and talk about other things with GAD at the moment.

There is one problem that I have observed which has not been addressed on numerous occasions by Dublin Bus for the 114 from Blackrock DART Station to Ticknock Hill. There is a bus on it's timetable that leaves from Blackrock Station at 17:15 in the evening that is very unreliable. What I mean is that it turns up & leaves the terminus late at Blackrock very frequently when it's probably goes through heavy traffic or suffering other delays while going through Sandyford. That bus had this problem yesterday of turning up late in Blackrock again. I was walking home through Carysfort Avenue yesterday. I saw the bus stopping at the entrance to UCD Business School at 17:11 yesterday. When I got up to St Augustine's School at around 17:25 yesterday; the bus still hadn't showed up probably until I turned walking out towards Castlebyrne Park.

When I got this bus from the station a few months back. It had a spare driver on it on that day it ran late. The bus turned up at around 17:30 or 17:35 in the evening to bring passengers back up on it's route to Ticknock. This type of problems of turning up late spreads to some of the marked in drivers as well. One of it's marked in drivers was on the bus facing this problem yesterday. This late scheduling does impact on picking up passengers for it's next bus at 17:50.

If the NTA had plans to improve the timetable for the 114 in the evening time when GAD take over from it in 2019; well that would be a start. It can address something good for it's passengers when that part of the timetable is frequently not being met by Dublin Bus. The passengers on the route could be getting better results if the buses were rescheduled in the evenings to make it leave the terminus at Blackrock on time.

punisher5112

dublinman1990 wrote: »

That livery does look very well. It's a good decision that they didn't put the white options for real from the bus livery survey onto the buses otherwise IMO it would have looked terrible. I want to go aside from the livery and talk about other things with GAD at the moment.

There is one problem that I have observed which has not been addressed on numerous occasions by Dublin Bus for the 114 from Blackrock DART Station to Ticknock Hill. There is a bus on it's timetable that leaves from Blackrock Station at 17:15 in the evening that is very unreliable. What I mean is that it turns up & leaves the terminus late at Blackrock very frequently when it's probably goes through heavy traffic or suffering other delays while going through Sandyford. That bus had this problem yesterday of turning up late in Blackrock again. I was walking home through Carysfort Avenue yesterday. I saw the bus stopping at the entrance to UCD Business School at 17:11 yesterday. When I got up to St Augustine's School at around 17:25 yesterday; the bus still hadn't showed up probably until I turned walking out towards Castlebyrne Park.

When I got this bus from the station a few months back. It had a spare driver on it on that day it ran late. The bus turned up at around 17:30 or 17:35 in the evening to bring passengers back up on it's route to Ticknock. This type of problems of turning up late spreads to some of the marked in drivers as well. One of it's marked in drivers was on the bus facing this problem yesterday. This late scheduling does impact on picking up passengers for it's next bus at 17:50.

If the NTA had plans to improve the timetable for the 114 in the evening time when GAD take over from it in 2019; well that would be a start. It can address something good for it's passengers when that part of the timetable is frequently not being met by Dublin Bus. The passengers on the route could be getting better results if the buses were rescheduled in the evenings to make it leave the terminus at Blackrock on time.

What do you want them to do fly over the traffic and other issues.

The bus has to travel on exactly the same roads with traffic.

They could pull a journey and have a bus sit there longer but I don't honestly see much extra if any added.

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

Better version of a decker in TFI livery here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/155839993@N04/40297279135/

I'm surprised by the lack of yellow handrails I thought they were an NTA requirement.

punisher5112

Stephen15 wrote: »

I'm surprised by the lack of yellow handrails I thought they were an NTA requirement.

I get the feeling go ahead had their say on it.
Just seems so.

AlekSmart

Stephen15 wrote: »

I'm surprised by the lack of yellow handrails I thought they were an NTA requirement.

The relevant guidelines are outlined in this publication from the National Disability Authority (nda)

http://nda.ie/Publications/Transport/Transport-Publications/

Recommended Accessibility
Guidelines for Public
Transport Operators in Ireland

Essentially the Republic continues to rely on the UK DfT guidelines,contained in their PSVAR regulations.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/1970/schedule/2/made

(

3) Any handrail in a regulated public service vehicle that is fitted in order to comply with this paragraph shall comply with the following requirements—..........

(d)have a slip-resistant surface;

(e)be capable of being easily and firmly gripped by a passenger; and

(f)contrast with the parts of the vehicle adjacent to the handrail.

The colour of such grabrails and stanchions does not appear to be the issue,but rather that such rails are of sufficent contrast to the surrounding area so as to improve their visibility.

It would appear that you can have any colour you like....as long as it contrasts with the surroundings

GM228

Got a reply today to the e-mail I sent the NTA.

GM228 wrote: »

Wonder will I get a meaningful reply?

Letter to the NTA wrote:

To whom it concerns,

I do hope this query finds itself with the appropriate person and I would be grateful if the Authority as a public body would supply a comprehensive (where appropriate) reply to each point I make.

My queries relate to the provision of public transport services for road and rail, particularly in relation to the recently awarded Go-Ahead (GA) and Bus Eireann (BE) competitive tendering contracts and the future of contract awarding from 2019 onwards.

1. In relation to the GA award for 10% of Dublin bus routes some media reports infer (*1) and indeed present as fact (*2) that the tender by Dublin Bus (DB) was a cheaper option than GA, but overall GA won on the most economically advantageous tender (MEAT) basis. Whilst I understand the principles of the MEAT basis and that this is indeed the normal basis for contract award I was wondering if this “understanding” is correct or miss-founded?

This has created confusion amongst the public in general as the same paper also reported potential savings of up to 30% for the state (*1), also another media report (*3) is suggestive that there are savings by the GA contract.

Can the NTA put clarity on these reports please and advise if GA or DB offered the best monetary aspect of the tender, if not when will they?

2. In relation to the above, can the NTA advise same with regards to the GA award of Kildare (former BE) routes and the BE award for Waterford services.

3. Anne Graham is quoted by the Irish Times (*3) as saying she “was not in a position to reveal how much Go-Ahead would be paid for the service until a contract stand-still period had passed”. This can be inferred as meaning the NTA will give details after the stand-still period, legally the minimum contract stand-still period is 14 days so this period is well passed, is this reporting accurate or has it been decided not to publish any details of the contracts now?

4. Can the NTA clarify it’s position in relation to awarding of contracts for the remaining 90% of DB and BE routes and the Irish Rail (IE) services from 2019 onwards and commitments required under the PSO Regulation.

It is well known that the NTA intend to tender the operation of the rail network from 2019 in accordance with the PSO regulation, but these intentions are not 100% certain in relation to the remaining bus network, all indications seem to suggest that competitive tendering will not apply to the remaining bus services (i.e Direct Award will continue) and how that relates to the requirements of the PSO Regulation.

The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport recently stated in the Dail that there will be no further tendering in the future of the remaining 90% of bus routes (*4), and the NTAs very recently published report (*5) also seems to indicate this by dealing with the “next” direct award contract.

5. would like to ask what provisions have been made with JJ Kavanagh regarding advertising of the new 139 service they are operating, I notice that as part of the contract they must supply a website detailing various information to be made available to the public regarding the service, but bar the NTA website there seems to be very little information on this service in the public domain, certainly nothing on JJs website or any Route 139 type website.

6. Can the NTA provide any information on the start date of the new DB Route 40L to link with Broombridge?

I look forward to your reply.

Regards

(*1) Irish Independent “Blow for Dublin Bus as UK firm wins contract for 24 routes in capital” – August 11th 2017.

https://independent.ie/irish-news/bl...-36021211.html

“The Irish Independent understands that the State-owned company scored higher than the UK firm Go-Ahead on price in a comparitive tendering rocess overseen by the National Transport Authority (NTA), but ranked lower on technical aspects”

“The NTA said it could not outline the savings which would be generated from the outsourcing of routes at this stage, but has previously said that operating costs could drop by as much as 30pc.”

(*2) Irish Independent “Questions remain on why services were outsourced” – August 11th 2017.

https://independent.ie/irish-news/qu...-36021212.html

“The fact that Dublin Bus won on price, but lost on technical or quality issues, is in itself interesting”

(*3) Irish Times “Go-Ahead to start operating some bus routes in Dublin next year” – August 11th 2017.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/cons...858%3fmode=amp

“NTA chief executive Anne Graham said Go-Ahead had offered the “most economically advantageous tender” and would bring a “fresh dimension” to Dublin’s bus services. She said she was not in a position to reveal how much Go-Ahead would be paid for the service until a contract stand-still period had passed, but was “confident the tendered service will result in savings for the State”. The NTA “expects improved punctuality and reliability” on existing services, she added.”

(*4) Shane Ross (Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport) “Dail Eireann – Bus Services Debate” 11th October 2017.

https://beta.oireachtas.ie/en/debate.../8/#pq-answers

“I can assure the Deputy that there are no plans whatsoever to tender for more than 10% of the services in the future”

(*5) NTA Statement Strategy 2018-2022 – published 11th March 2018

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/new...egy-2018-2022/

“Within the period of the this Statement of Strategy, decisions will be made on the next Direct Award contracts for Dublin Bus, Bus Éireann and Iarnród Éireann and the extent of any further competition in the subsidised bus market”

Will update with any reply.

And their reply:-

Jeremy Ryan, Head of Public Transport Contracts, NTA wrote:

Dear John

I refer to your email on 26 March 2018 to the National Transport Authority regarding public transport services, and set out answers to each of your questions below.

1. Can the NTA advise if GA or DB offered the best monetary aspect of the tender, if not when will they?
The preferred bidder for the Outer Dublin Metropolitan Area contract was selected based on a combination of quality and price aspects. In this case 35% of overall marks were available for quality aspects of tenderers’ bids and 65% were available for price. On this basis, Go-Ahead offered the most economically advantageous tender.

2. Can the NTA advise same with regards to the GA award of Kildare (former BE) routes and the BE award for Waterford services?
The same quality and price criteria and percentage mark weightings (35%:65%) were used in the selecting the preferred bidder for the Kildare corridor and Waterford City contracts.

3. Has it been decided not to publish any details of the contracts now?
The NTA will issue an award notice to the Official Journal of the EU within 48 days of the formal award of each of the three contracts, which will set out such details as are required under EU procurement law. This will include the contract price.

4. Can the NTA clarify its position in relation to awarding of contracts for the remaining 90% of DB and BE routes and the Irish Rail (IE) services from 2019 onwards?
The NTA is currently considering its position in relation to the direct award of bus contracts to Dublin Bus or Bus Éireann from 2019 onwards. As part of this process, stakeholder and public consultations will take place later this year.

In relation to Irish Rail services, national legislation currently requires the Authority to directly award contracts for the operation of rail passenger services to Irish Rail.

5. Information on Route 139 service
Leaflets were distributed by the NTA to households in the catchment area of Route 139 in advance of commencement of services in March. The Transport for Ireland website contains timetable information in relation to the new service. The operator (JJ Kavanagh) has also provided timetable information on its website for Route 139 under “Town and City services”

6. Start date for new bus service to Luas Broombridge stop
The route for this service remains under discussion with Dublin Bus, and no start date has been confirmed.
Regards

Jeremy Ryan
Head of Public Transport Contracts

In a follow up e-mail they confirmed that formal contracts have not yet issued for any of the three contracts.

LuckyLloyd

In my opinion, there should be transparent information proffered on the 35 / 65 breakdowns and how they decided GA were superior overall. That involves sharing the price obviously, but they also need to expand on quality perceptions.

This stuff should be a matter of public record.

AlekSmart

GM228 wrote: »

Got a reply today to the e-mail I sent the NTA.

In a follow up e-mail they confirmed that formal contracts have not yet issued for any of the three contracts.

I love the terminlogy......

In relation to Irish Rail services, national legislation currently requires the Authority to directly award contracts for the operation of rail passenger services to Irish Rail.

Otherwise,well done for the legwork GM228

dfx-

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

In my opinion, there should be transparent information proffered on the 35 / 65 breakdowns and how they decided GA were superior overall. That involves sharing the price obviously, but they also need to expand on quality perceptions.

This stuff should be a matter of public record.

Yep, it's not clearing up much at all there. And it should be easily accessible public record at a known date, which is last year at this stage.

Not proffered to the Official Journal of the EU (whatever that is) to fulfil legal requirements at some unspecified date..

punisher5112

They can't let them fail as it would show how they are and have been selling off all public assests.

Look at the Luas run by a huge multinational.
Cie spent a fortune on it before it was decided to be given off.
See how it stays the same operator but just changed their name the odd time.

GM228

dfx- wrote: »

Not proffered to the Official Journal of the EU (whatever that is) to fulfil legal requirements at some unspecified date..

The Official Journal of the EU (OJ) is a daily publication of all EU legislation (Directives, Regulations etc) and any national notices or information required to be published under EU law. It is the EUs version of the Irish Iris Oifigiúil (IO) gazette.

No EU law or notices/infomration required under EU law will have the force of law unless published in the OJ, the same way no national legislation will have the force of law unless published in the IO.

All contract awards issued under procurement law must be announced via the OJ (with some exceptions depending on value and contract type).

soundman45

Go Ahead have an advert up on a recruitment site today looking for drivers, perhaps they are not inundated with applicants as many thought.

devnull

soundman45 wrote: »

Go Ahead have an advert up on a recruitment site today looking for drivers, perhaps they are not inundated with applicants as many thought.

They were going to have to advertise anyway though because they've recently won a second contract that their initial recruitment driver wouldn't have taken into account.

Cookie_Monster

punisher5112 wrote: »

They can't let them fail as it would show how they are and have been selling off all public assests.

Look at the Luas run by a huge multinational.
Cie spent a fortune on it before it was decided to be given off.
See how it stays the same operator but just changed their name the odd time.

What public assets have been sold off?

punisher5112

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

What public assets have been sold off?

Land, nama assets which are ours the people of Ireland, Telecom eireann, aerlingus, rte land, many many publicly owned areas such as the towers along the east coast, huge amounts of housing stock or units as they call them to hedge funds etc etc etc....

Cookie_Monster

punisher5112 wrote: »

Land, nama assets which are ours the people of Ireland, Telecom eireann, aerlingus, rte land, many many publicly owned areas such as the towers along the east coast, huge amounts of housing stock or units as they call them to hedge funds etc etc etc....

right... and that has what to do with Go Ahead exactly?

punisher5112

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

right... and that has what to do with Go Ahead exactly?

I didn't say it did exactly but more so the nta who are pushing this as a fg thing that they do.

Sell sell sell.

Stephen15

punisher5112 wrote: »

I didn't say it did exactly but more so the nta who are pushing this as a fg thing that they do.

Sell sell sell.

To be fair FF were into it aswell. They were the first ones to start trying to push bus tendering when they were in government.

antoinolachtnai

Stephen15 wrote: »

To be fair FF were into it aswell. They were the first ones to start trying to push bus tendering when they were in government.

Bus routes which aren’t internally operated by the transport authority have to be tendered. It’s the law.

LuckyLloyd

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Bus routes which aren’t internally operated by the transport operator have to be tendered. It’s the law.

Yeah but the law says nothing about given it to a more expensive private operator based in another jurisdiction.

XPS_Zero

punisher5112 wrote: »

Land, nama assets which are ours the people of Ireland, Telecom eireann, aerlingus, rte land, many many publicly owned areas such as the towers along the east coast, huge amounts of housing stock or units as they call them to hedge funds etc etc etc....

In fairness NAMAs assets were only "public" because they were toxic assets we took off banks books in a glorified second bailout, the idea was always to sell them off not keep them, because otherwise the state would have made a huge loss or made nothing back at all on the bailouts (already the banks have paid back sweet FA from the main bailout despite repeatedly lying saying they paid it back).

TE was always a disaster and stayed one after privatization because their philosophy and attitude to customers as Eir is still as if they are a state monopoly where their customers have nobody else to go to - their customer service attitude is frankly stunning, no matter how many times they rebrand nothing changes it really is a thing to behold.

Aer Lingus sure but does the state really need to own airlines, sugar companies etc? cant' we confine state investment to areas like healthcare and education and public transport the market does not do well (ie rail)


As to the bus thing, competition is not the same as privatization no matter how often unions and far leftys say it is. The central assets are still owned and controlled and regulated by the state. Nobody can look at CIE honestly and think there isn't a case for competition, given how terrible their work practices and management are.

antoinolachtnai

Incidentally, we don't know whether the price that DB tendered was the same as its current costs under the direct award contracts or whether they put in a lower price for the purposes of the competitive tender.

AlekSmart

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yeah but the law says nothing about given it to a more expensive private operator based in another jurisdiction.

It (the Law) does'nt have to say anything about it.

We joined the EEC in 1970 and put in place a process,ratified by the Irish electorate on several occasions,which has developed into the current European Community.

There are quite a few who continue to express surprise at the Europeanization of Ireland,but it really is a bit too late for that now,particularly as many of us were more than willing to accept the Structural Development,Infrastructural and Area Aid funds,without ever contemplating that there was a caveat to all of this inward funding.

To be honest,the caveats are not exactly draconian,and in general terms tend to be positive for the Consumer/Customer.

Many of us,for example,travel freely throughout Europe and return full of admiration for the Bus systems in other European Cities and Regions,yet we manage not to notice that many of these excellent,reliable and affordable systems are operated on a Tendered basis,often by the same multi national companies which are roundly shouted down back home.

(We also,by and large,tend not to notice items such as Local Taxation,Property Taxation,and Service Charges which form an integral part of how these services are provided...but this is a topic for another thread ?)

With the National Transport Authority being 100% an entity of the Irish State,and thus far,retaining 100% Ownership of such assets as it provides to the successful tenderers,it does not compute that Anything is being given to Johnny Foreigner.

Equally,there is every facility available for ANY of the CIE subsidiaries to tender for the exact same opportunities throughout the EU,which would have been unthinkable (impossible) pre EEC/EU.

The well flagged future has arrived,and it's not all doom'n gloom either.
As with all change based situations,many many people will see it as unversally bad,many will struggle and perhaps withdraw from engaging with the entire process,however,most will adapt,most will learn to manage whatever is required to make the best of the new situation....and life will continue.

There are far greater threats to Ireland and it's people,than EU inspired Competitive Tendering of Public Transport

end of the road

XPS_Zero wrote: »

As to the bus thing, competition is not the same as privatization no matter how often unions and far leftys say it is. The central assets are still owned and controlled and regulated by the state. Nobody can look at CIE honestly and think there isn't a case for competition, given how terrible their work practices and management are.

i personally can say there is no case for competition, or at least the type of competition being offered. if it was viable to have multiple operators on the same route like the commercial routes, then competition might be worth it. however the type of "competition" being offered "here is your operator take it or leave it" is not worth the time or money in my view.

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

however the type of "competition" being offered "here is your operator take it or leave it" is not worth the time or money in my view.

You mean like how it used to be with Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann? And still is with Irish Rail.

devnull

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yeah but the law says nothing about given it to a more expensive private operator based in another jurisdiction.

More expensive is what you think, despite the fact there has been nothing to back that view up aside from unverified speculation, whereas a statement from Anne Graham seemed to suggest otherwise as another posted pointed out a number of pages ago.

At the end of the day I care more about the quality of the products and services offered than the nationality of the company., It's great to support Irish but I'd rather have a foreign company who does a good job than an Irish company who does one not as good.

dfx-

devnull wrote: »

More expensive is what you think, despite the fact there has been nothing to back that view up aside from unverified speculation, whereas a statement from Anne Graham seemed to suggest otherwise as another posted pointed out a number of pages ago.

At the end of the day I care more about the quality of the products and services offered than the nationality of the company., It's great to support Irish but I'd rather have a foreign company who does a good job than an Irish company who does one not as good.

suggestive statements or quotes don't cut it as fact either.

Stephen15

n97 mini wrote: »

You mean like how it used to be with Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann? And still is with Irish Rail.

And how it is in pretty much every other European country's rail network except the UK and yet manage to operate efficiently.

GM228

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Incidentally, we don't know whether the price that DB tendered was the same as its current costs under the direct award contracts or whether they put in a lower price for the purposes of the competitive tender.

Direct Award contracts see the operator keep the fares box, tendered contracts don't so I would say they are not the same or possibly not even comparable as revenue needs to be taken into consideration also when pitching a bid.

Mutant z

Good to see a private operator getting a major foothold in our capital city.

devnull

dfx- wrote: »

suggestive statements or quotes don't cut it as fact either.

I agree, but a statement suggesting something from a body who has awarded the contract holds more weight than pure speculation, even if it isn't a fact.

The only thing we know for certain is that Bus Eireann were not the cheapest but they still won the Waterford City contract.