Proposals for extra train services in North Tipperary...

[Alan French]

I wouldn’t be too negative about the new timetable. To start with the down side, clearly the biggest loss is the 17.45 Limerick-Nenagh. The earlier time of 17.05 is too early for most commuters.

They will argue that the train never attracted many commuters anyway, so there’s not much loss. I’m hearing two conflicting reports here: one is this train is an essential alternative to the congested streets of Limerick. The other is that the roads are so good and the train is so slow that no one uses it. Can someone enlighten me?

In any case, I don’t think they should give up so easily on attracting commuters. The new timetable needs one additional train (a class 22, by the sound of it) which finishes its roster at 15.50. This should be available to operate the 17.45 Limerick-Nenagh (or at least to Birdhill). See also Jack Doherty’s suggestion in #127.

The new timetable follows the precedent of the other lines radiating from Dublin, which all have a train arriving in Dublin before 09.00, and another one arriving a little later. There is also a choice of evening trains from Dublin. (Notice that this is the pattern for the Dublin-Rosslare line, which is sparsely served at other times.) The Nenagh line stood out as a glaring omission, so it’s good to see the gap being filled. I reckon that the aim is to offer choice of times: people were driving from Roscrea or Nenagh to a station on the main line because that gave them flexibility, which the Nenagh line doesn’t. The through train to Dublin is basically a good idea, if the path works; in recent years IR have tended to forget that a change of trains can be a deterrent, and it’s worth running through trains where possible.

The 13.40 Dublin-Limerick won’t benefit the Nenagh line directly, but do you notice that it’s restoring a useful service that was withdrawn until 2009 (previously at 13.25)?

About the absence of access to the far platform at Roscrea: Perhaps, once the service starts, the sight of a train stopping but unable to handle passengers will put the pressure on to do something – either to build a bridge or a back entrance, or to change the rules. Pressure may overcome the “can’t be done” attitude. I reckon that the simplest solution is a gate and ramp from the far side. What about the idea of a pedestrian crossing with barriers and lights? These are found in Holland, and I wonder if Irish rules specifically forbid them.

I know that this sudden political interference is unsettling, but it’s probably better than the old attitude of “I’ve no intention of intervening in IR’s decision-making”. The problem is not so much that one politician is pushing a local project, but that others, in other places, are not pushing theirs. If pressure were to come from several places at once, the whole scene would change. IR would no longer be able to dig their heels in when the need for an improved timetable is glaringly obvious. It’s like what is beginning to happen with the threat to rural national schools; if one place is looking to keep its school, that’s seeking a favour; if several places nationwide are looking to keep their schools, it needs a change in the decision-making process.

[Colm Moore]

Originally Posted by Alan French

I know that this sudden political interference is unsettling, but it’s probably better than the old attitude of “I’ve no intention of intervening in IR’s decision-making”. The problem is not so much that one politician is pushing a local project, but that others, in other places, are not pushing theirs. If pressure were to come from several places at once, the whole scene would change. IR would no longer be able to dig their heels in when the need for an improved timetable is glaringly obvious. It’s like what is beginning to happen with the threat to rural national schools; if one place is looking to keep its school, that’s seeking a favour; if several places nationwide are looking to keep their schools, it needs a change in the decision-making process.

To be honest, there is little difference in this type of interference and "we'll demand it, but not use it" and the 'buy the election' mentalities that spend €100m on the WRC or any number of other wacky projects.

Ministers and government should set high level policy structures, not demand specific services. The mid-level should be down to the NTA and the day to day running down to the operators.

Without wanting to get into discussing schools, let us discuss train stations instead. If I change your text.

It’s like what is beginning to happen with the threat to train stations ; if one place is looking to keep its train station, that’s seeking a favour; if several places nationwide are looking to keep their train stations, it needs a change in the decision-making process.

I wouldn't absolutely agree. The provision of stations should be down to what socio-economic benefit they deliver and some thresholds should exist. Some stations are very poorly used, while other places could do with a station (or indeed a second station). Potentially some standard needs to be set such that the most people are served with what resources are available and while nobody should be screwed over, there are some services (not restricting that to trains) that are living on borrowed time. The people of East Wall / North Strand / Ballybough suffer all of the inconvenience of the railway, but have little of the convenience. Oranmore, Blackpool, Ballyfermot or Phibsborough-Glasnevin should have had stations long before Crusheen or Ardrahan. Should Crusheen or Woodlawn keep their unused stations, but Nenagh or Clonmel (assuming meaningful services can be put in place within the current cost constraints) lose theirs?

[Destructix]

Clonmel has potential though. Just the services are poor and no Sunday service. Even with this patronage is still much better than Nenagh.