# Westlink Toll Bridge



## shnaek (27 Aug 2004)

From todays indo-



> The toll bridge cost €38m to build and since it opened in 1990, NTR has generated €230m, with a further €100m going to the government, Mr Brewer said.



and 



> Based on the fact that the bridge will be operated by NTR for another 20 years, toll road users will end up shelling out a total of €1.5bn over the 30 years it is controlled by the company. And this is based on charges staying at current levels.



This is crazy.


----------



## XXXAnother PersonXXX (27 Aug 2004)

*.*

The regular traffic jam it causes often extends to Tallaght. How can a company be allowed to cause this amount of mayhem? Would I be allowed to set up a company that blocks the free flow of traffic?

So what can we do about it? 

Refuse to pay? What would happen when motorists queue up on the M50, and refuse to pay? would they be forced to open the gates? 

It wouldn't be illegal. Can't beat a bit of civil disobedience.


----------



## google (27 Aug 2004)

*re*

"Refuse to pay? What would happen when motorists queue up on the M50, and refuse to pay?"

I'd imagine the guards would be called.


----------



## daltonr (28 Aug 2004)

*Re: re*

If course driving would be easier and cheaper without tolls on the M50.    Is there really anyone out there still naive enough to think that the goverment wants motoring to be easier or cheaper?

Despite already paying way above the odds for these roads,  the tolls keep going up, instead of being abolished like they should be.

The worst part is that Public Private Partnership is talked about by this government as a good thing.   With interest rates historically low they could easily borrow and repay the cost of capital investment, but instead they choose this option. 

In London there's a congestion charge which actually seems to have worked to reduce congestion.    In Dublin there's a toll which actually creates congestion.

Those Paddy Irish Man jokes weren't too far from the truth were they?

-Rd


----------



## fatherdougalmaguire (28 Aug 2004)

*Re: re*

Would it be such an This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language-ways idea to give people an option, when renewing their tax, to pay a supplement for national toll road usage. Maybe €50 a year for unlimited toll road usage. Then those payees could use the EazyPass lanes? Instead of having one EazyPass lane and 5 other pay lanes the inverse would be the case.

Of course, I always wondered why they didn't just do that from the outset and *force* people into EazyPass. That probably would have made life easier for everyone.


----------



## XXXAnother PersonXXX (28 Aug 2004)

*.*

FDM - what about people who don't ever use the toll bridge? - like people who live in kork?

Was your post in jest?

Even simplier is to get rid of the toll booths. They've collected far more than their fair share.


----------



## fatherdougalmaguire (28 Aug 2004)

*Re: .*



> to give people an option



So only the people who live in or around toll roads could take the option. I'm not saying to add it to road tax. That wouldn't be fair. I'm just saying that on the tax renewal form there's be a tick-box and you pay something extra for year-long EazyPass use.



> Even simplier is to get rid of the toll booths


Absolutely! But what are the chances of that happening?


----------



## shnaek (30 Aug 2004)

*Re: .*

I heard a story from an American friend of mine who lived outside Boston. He told me that they had tolled a few roads out near his place promising that they'd remove the tolls once the roads were paid for. Which of course didn't happen. Until the brakes on a truck failed as it approached the toll booths on one of these roads. The truck plowed into the waiting cars killing many. Soon afterward a politician promised to remove the tolls if elected. He was and he did.


----------



## Geoffreyod (30 Aug 2004)

*Easy Pass Lane actually slows traffic*

The northbound easy-pass lane actually causes congestion on the M50 and slows down both those who use the easy pass and all the other motorists too.
This is because there aren't enough lanes going northward just before the toll plaza and motorists have to exit the outer lane of the motorway which becomes the easy pass lane into the more conjested inner lanes but can't merge into the inner lanes because of traffic jams and so hold up everyone on the outer lane of the motorway including easy pass customers who are behind them.  
Easy pass lane on northbound M50 should be returned to normal traffic as it is in the best interests of everyone.


----------



## car (30 Aug 2004)

*north bound eazy pass lane*

Geoff, I must disagree with you on that one.  I use the toll bridge with eazy pass 6-7 days a week (going north in the a.m.).  While it can lead to a temporary traffic jam if someone gets caught in the lane, the majority of the time it is very much quicker.   
A couple of weeks ago, as an exercise, I left the then blocked up eazy pass lane with about 15 cars to go to a toll booth with 4-5, of course the eazy pass freed up as soon as I left it and the car that was behind me in the EP lane went through the bridge before me. DOH!   Wont do that again.
Whats that law where the other queue always moves quicker?


----------



## Kiddo (31 Aug 2004)

*toll bridge*

Car

Think thats called Murphys Law...happens to me all the time.

Seriously the toll bridge is a joke..even on a sunday its jammers...and as for the idiots who get in the "exact change" lane and then rummage around for 5 minutes trying to make up €1.50 arghhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## Geoffreyod (1 Sep 2004)

*close easy pass lane*

From my observations it appears to be reducing traffic flow because people have to get out of the outer lane of the motorway up to a mile before the toll plaza.  They have to slow down traffic flow on the outer lane to merge with the already slowly moving inner lane and slow that lane down still further.

You only get benefit from the easy pass lane once you are within a 200-300 hundred metres of it after having been held up in slow moving traffic by other traffic trying to exit the easy pass lane.

Also, people coming off the M4/N4 can't avail of the easy pass lane because it is the outermost lane so they would have to cut accross a number of lanes to get to it.  They have to use the standard lanes and mix the rest of us mere mortals.   
I know I'm right on this one.  I've had long enough looking at the lane in operation at around 4:15pm every day for the last two months to see how the lane operates under heavy load.
The M50 is already operating above capacity and the presence of the northbound easy pass lane reduces what capicity there is.


----------



## PGD (1 Sep 2004)

*Re: close easy pass lane*

if you can't merge from the N4 down and across then you shouldn't be driving!


----------



## MonsieurBond (23 May 2005)

New protest website in the Shane Ross campaign - Westlink Action Group - [broken link removed]. A protest is being planned for the May 27th NTR AGM.

I notice that this thread is no longer accessible from - the AAM link points to the original bulletin board. 

Can the link be fixed from this end by a moderator?

The broken link points to .


----------



## Capaill (23 May 2005)

Interesting to note the picutres on the Westlink Action Group show a clear toll bridge and clear lanes on the motorway.  Not exactly a marketing masterstroke there by the WAG<g>


----------



## Humpback (23 May 2005)

*Wag*

I also note from the [broken link removed] site, that there are no details of who exactly is in the Action Group.

Is it just me or is this not slightly suspicious/unusual?

Only name anywhere to do with the site is the Senator himself. Would like to see what kinds of people are on the Action Group, and what kind of vested interests are represented.


----------



## Franko29 (24 May 2005)

Motorists are any easy target VRT, high raod tax, fuel tax, tolls speeding fines on the motorways.

Money for old rope, why would the gov give that up. 

Motoring contributes massively to the exchequer are constantly squeezed and don't have any sort of lobby.

At least kiss me on the neck before you that minister.


----------



## contemporary (24 May 2005)

*Re: Wag*



			
				ronan_d_john said:
			
		

> I also note from the [broken link removed] site, that there are no details of who exactly is in the Action Group.


 
Shane Ross held a meeting in the red cow some months ago, a committee was formed however IMO it was the usual lot, Mick Murphy, Socalist Councillor I believe is one of them (Mick, formerly of MIJAG and Anti Bin Tax Prisioner)

"*We may plan a protest" I dont hold out much hope tbh*


----------



## Humpback (24 May 2005)

*Re: Wag*



			
				contemporary said:
			
		

> Shane Ross held a meeting in the red cow some months ago, a committee was formed


 
I realise that. I'm on his mailing list at the moment - which is probably in contravention of data protection by the way.

However, never has the actual details of who forms the membership of the committee or action group been released. The only people mentioned are the good senator and Eamonn Dunphy.

IMHO, this is very dodgy. Why keep such information secret?

I've mailed the Senator asking for details on who the membership of the group is, but no response - 3 days and counting.


----------



## Dipole (26 May 2005)

At the public meeting they offered the opportunity to anyone who attended to be on the board.  Very few volunteered and those who had already done behind the scenes work were obvious candidate as they weren't just talkers but doers.


----------



## contemporary (26 May 2005)

from their forum



> Hi guys,
> 
> 
> Sorry to keep you in the dark on this one. The steering committee was formed after a meeting in the Red Cow Inn in January.
> ...


----------



## RainyDay (26 May 2005)

*Re: Wag*



			
				ronan_d_john said:
			
		

> I'm on his mailing list at the moment - which is probably in contravention of data protection by the way.


What makes you think this?


----------



## Humpback (27 May 2005)

*Re: Wag*



			
				RainyDay said:
			
		

> What makes you think this?


 
Because it's unsolicited e-mail. He's keeping a list of people e-mail addresses and then using it as his audience for broadcast e-mails.

He gathered the mails by saying "Enter your e-mail address here and send a mail to the minister, ntr, the Taoiseach etc to tell them blah blah." 

He didn't ask if the e-mail address could be kept, and used in the future to communicate with my. Nowhere was it mentioned that sending an e-mail of complaint also meant signing up for anything.

If you keep someone's e-mail address on file, you must ask them first. And you must separately ask if you can communicate with them at a later date.

Neither of these things did he do.


----------



## RainyDay (28 May 2005)

*Re: Wag*

Interesting - you might consider reporting this matter to the Data Protection Commissioner.


----------



## Humpback (30 May 2005)

*Re: Wag*



			
				RainyDay said:
			
		

> Interesting - you might consider reporting this matter to the Data Protection Commissioner.


 
Have you seen the nightmare you have to go through to report something to the Data Protection Commissioner?

Been already trying for 3 months to try to get Aer Lingus to stop sending me e-mails.

Filter to trash.....


----------



## Humpback (30 May 2005)

With regards to Mr.Bensons comments above about who is on the WAG - 

Quote:
Hi guys, 


Sorry to keep you in the dark on this one. The steering committee was formed after a meeting in the Red Cow Inn in January. 

The members are Ralph Benson, Tony Colley, Peter Coogan, Noel Morgan, Michael Fitzgerald, and Shane Ross. This is the group which has decided strategy so far, and attended meetings with Martin Cullen and so on. All of us have an interest or involvement in the areas of motoring and road safety in one way or another. I do the website: I'll update the homepage with more background info soon. 

Best wishes, Ralph Benson


On their forum (which has now mysteriously disappeared), I asked for the details and backgrounds of the members to be provided since we had no way of knowing what the motivations were of the people mentioned, and whether or not they were just cronies and mates of the Senator.

It does seem however that Mr.Benson is webmaster for the Senator. While this is perfectly legitimate for being part of the WAG, it does whif of cronies and mates rather than a legitimate action group.

Later in the day....

Forum is here now - [broken link removed] - and it appears that Mr.Benson has removed my most recent post questioning the backgrounds of the people behind the WAG.

All very dodgy IMHO.


----------



## RainyDay (30 May 2005)

*Re: Wag*



			
				ronan_d_john said:
			
		

> Have you seen the nightmare you have to go through to report something to the Data Protection Commissioner?


Hardly a nightmare - It's a 1-2 page form with relevant details. I've been through the process last year, and my complaint ended up being one of the case studies in the Commissioner's [broken link removed] with the spamming ex-Councillor Jon Rainey being named & shamed by the commissioner.


----------



## Purple (1 Jun 2005)

> the spamming ex-Councillor Jon Rainey being named & shamed by the commissioner.


Hi RainyDay,
If my question is offensive then I apologise in advance but would you have made the same complaint if he was a labour party councillor and not a former PD turned independent turned FG man?
I used to live in north Dublin and I could have heated the house for the winter with the crap I got through the door from the Labour party. I know it's different to sending stuff to your e-mail but it's the same thing in principal.


----------

