Dublin bus routes privatised.

I have no objection to a private operation providing the service providing quality of service is maintained and improved, and the standards of working conditions are not adversely affected.

It's interesting that the cost to the consumer and taxpayer is not listed with your other two caveats.
 

For God's sake man, will you stop posting facts to this poster
 
Any organisation which cannot efficiently reallocate resources cannot be efficient. Therefore any organisation which cannot reduce staff numbers depending on demand and need is inefficient. That applies to every Public Sector and heavily Unionised body.
 
It's interesting that the cost to the consumer and taxpayer is not listed with your other two caveats.


???
One of the reasons that I'm skeptical about this outsourcing insofar that it will provide improved services to the consumer is on the basis that I doubt if the consumer will see anything in the range of reduced ticket prices.
As for the taxpayer, it has been stated that the NTA will pay Go Ahead to provide the service. It remains to be seen, how much is to be paid, and what benefit to the taxpayer there will be (if any).
 

The NTA has stated that there is no requirement for job losses due to increased number passengers. As well as that, the option to move over to Go Ahead to work as drivers seems to be on the table also.
Why reduce numbers?
 
Last edited:
As for the taxpayer, it has been stated that the NTA will pay Go Ahead to provide the service. It remains to be seen, how much is to be paid, and what benefit to the taxpayer there will be (if any).

The NTA must be confident that any subvention to Go-Ahead will be less than that paid to Dublin Bus..
 
The NTA has stated that there is no requirement for job losses due to increased number passengers. As well as that, the option to move over to Go Ahead to work as drivers seems to be on the table also.
If there is no net saving to the State then it shouldn't be done.
If the proposal included a reduction in numbers (and a saving to the State) the unions would have stopped the whole thing.

Why reduce numbers?
To save taxpayers money and spend it where it will be of greater benefit to the State.
 
The NTA must be confident that any subvention to Go-Ahead will be less than that paid to Dublin Bus..

True. But it still remains to be seen how much is being saved (if anything at all). It then remains to be seen if the employee's terms of employment are maintained or enhanced. It is of course possible that additional employment opportunities arise from this.
But if employee wages are reduced, to what they would of got in Dublin Bus, then it remains to be seen where the savings go. Will they go to providing cheaper fares for consumers, or additional profits for shareholders? My understanding is that Go Ahead is broadly based in the UK. If savings go to shareholders, then that is income leaving this country.