[Article] Gilmore's Metro stance criticised

[Colm Moore]

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...reaking50.html

Gilmore's Metro stance criticised
STEVEN CARROLL

Two Dublin North TDs have criticised Labour Party leader Eamon Gilmore over comments he made about the Metro North plan.

Fine Gael health spokesman Dr James Reilly and former Green Party leader Trevor Sargent both expressed surprise that Mr Gilmore would stall the building of the Metro North project in the current economic climate.

Mr Gilmore said yesterday that if in power Labour would redo the National Development plan and “prioritise those projects likely to create the most jobs”.

“Metro North would be shot back,” he told Marian Finucane on RTE Radio.

Dr Reilly said Mr Gilmore had shown a “negative attitude” to the project which he sees as a “key transport and jobs initiative”.

Dr Reilly said the project, work on which is expected to begin in April, would generate 37,000 jobs.

“The Labour Party’s attitude shocks me,” he said.

“They claim they will invest in jobs and critical infrastructure, but…Eamonn GIlmore said he would push back the Metro North project…Now is the time to invest in jobs in Dublin North.”

Mr Sargent said a willingness to shelve the project raised questions about Mr Gilmore’s position on job creation.

“To state that Metro North is not a priority for any government displays a major lack of understanding about the economic importance of North Dublin as part of the North/South economic corridor and how it will contribute to the economic recovery of the country,” Mr Sargent said.

“It is abundantly clear that Labour will cause more damage to the economy by making short-termist decisions that will be counterproductive to job creation.”

The Government in July announced it would allocate some €5.7 billion for transport projects including the Metro North and Dart Underground as part of the Infrastructure Investment Priorities 2010-2016.

The Railway Procurement Agency this week said work on the long-awaited line from St Stephen’s Green to Dublin airport and north Co Dublin will begin in April.

[dowlingm]

Is building MN official FG policy?

[fat controller]

Originally Posted by dowlingm

Is building MN official FG policy?

who care's as long as it's built!!!

[dowlingm]

my point being that if it was FG policy, it wouldn't be just a couple of north Dublin TDs complaining.

[essoII]

Interesting article in todays Independent that points out the costs for M.N. have dropped by a third. I'd be interested to know the sources of their information though.

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...d-2371946.html

[Mark Gleeson]

Those numbers are pretty accurate based on what we know and people we have spoken to.

[essoII]

That's good to hear Mark.

Ironically, here's a classic Frank McDonald article from today's Irish Times:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...280701137.html

I cannot understand this mans logic. He essentially puts down metro north as an outlandish, unrealistic vanity project and then goes to promote this Blue Line bus rapid transit link from no-where to no-where.

The places in-between are already well served by public transport, as are the places it terminates. And he calls it a bargain for €33m?

An example of irrational insanity at its finest, in my opinion.

[Ronald Binge]

If BRT is to be used at all it should be on a radial route. This proposal is just crap. Frank wasn't so hot on BRT during the Luas wars.

[James Howard]

Isn't this very similar to one of the DART feeder routes that were set up when the DART was built? I think it was the 52. It was utterly useless at the time as it only ran every 40 minutes, so you were usually better off walking from UCD to Sydney Parade if you wanted to get a DART.

[dowlingm]

Lobbing people off at St Vincents (as the video on blueline.ie implies) isn't much a DART feeder. However, if RPA operated this service at least we might see a multi-door bus actually use all door boarding and proof of payment.

[essoII]

http://www.rpa.ie/en/news/Pages/Metr...sandFacts.aspx

A war of words and facts begininning?

[James Howard]

I had wondered how they would manage to turn these at Sydney Parade. But Vincents isn't that far from Sydney Parade so that would appear to be somewhat logical to me. What is the difference between these and regular bendy busses anyway?

Anyway, that myths and facts thing is necessary. This "luas overrun" is very frequently quoted. In my memory the Luas was originally costed at about £250 million. Due to a deliberate sabotage by an incoming governement, it was held up for 7 or 8 years. When they eventually built it, they had expanded the project and due to construction inflation it ended up costing three times as many euros as pounds which is where the overrun came from. The port tunnel overran, but in recent years, the costing of infrastructure delivery has become a lot more reliable than it was 10 or 15 year ago.

I had fallen for this 5 billion figure which seems to have been widely quoted in the media. At 5 billion, it makes little to no sense to build Metro, but if it can be done at half of that, then it begins to make sense. I would still be ambivalent about the relative beneifts of doing this versus covering the city with tram lines which could be done for similar money.

[Colm Moore]

Originally Posted by dowlingm

Lobbing people off at St Vincents (as the video on blueline.ie implies) isn't much a DART feeder. However, if RPA operated this service at least we might see a multi-door bus actually use all door boarding and proof of payment.

Only if the bus stops are big enough and someone hasn't parked in them.

[dowlingm]

Originally Posted by James Howard

I had wondered how they would manage to turn these at Sydney Parade.

Tricky, no question but if you're going to lash out that kind of money then a way should be found. Probably you'd just keep going to Sandymount Strand and create a terminus there on one of the car parks. If we are building expensive elevators and overbridges for the disabled to access transport then asking them to walk half a kilometre to "connect" is a bit much.