Transport 21: Progress in (Slow) Motion
There’s a new ad telling us how good Transport 21 will be when it’s all done. And it might be right, but the phrase “Progress in Motion” is not nearly as catchy as Noel Dempsey’s assertion that the timetable for completion was always “indicative” rather than exact. It’s less exciting than him saying there has been some “slippage” on an unrealistic original timetable. Or the revelation a third of the delivery dates have been postponed.
But it’s the future. And it’s grafitti free.
No wonder they’re blowing the budget. For instance; how much is that giant child going to cost?
Comment by Brock Landers | April 8, 2008 at 12:55 pmAll of their timetables are indicative rather than definitive. As, indeed, their signs saying “seats are not for feet” are apparently just a discussion topic.
Comment by TinMan18 | April 8, 2008 at 1:39 pmPerhaps they should re-brand this as “Full On Idle” (with thanks to The Breeders)?
A little off-topic, but an Italian friend of mine used to say that it is better to arrive late and smell good. Sage advice.
Comment by JD | April 8, 2008 at 2:13 pm@JD: we’d better order a crate load of Lynx Dark Temptation for Noel Dempsey so.
Comment by Catherine | April 8, 2008 at 2:25 pmGrrrr Arrgh
They could buy some new buses for my route which is still using the eleven year old inaccessible buses which leak through the lights fixtures when it rains.
I notice how the 46a and 42 routes have had their entire fleets replaced twice now since my route last had it’s fleet replaced.
Comment by Mark | April 8, 2008 at 2:25 pmWhat does the 21 stand for anyway? 21 years before all the projects are completed?
Maybe that’s just indicative.
Comment by Quint | April 8, 2008 at 3:25 pmReminds me of one of those info-movies from say, Logan’s Run, telling you that getting topped at 21 is gonna be great.
Comment by Steve K | April 8, 2008 at 4:18 pmSunday’s 19.00H Enterprise from Belfast (and presumably the earlier Dublin-Belfast train) was replaced by a bus. It seems that Irish Rail ‘could not provide a crew from Dublin’. Don’t hold your breath, lads!
Comment by Anne | April 8, 2008 at 10:31 pmErr…if we’re allowing the government to run ads (funded by the taxpayer mind) about how great their policies shouldn’t we just do as the yanks do and allow political advertising? Or just let the public comment on progress on the ground like some folks did here.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/28/50765402_c9afaf9e46.jpg?v=0
http://www.flickr.com/photos/59435261@N00/50765402/
Comment by Dan Sullivan | April 9, 2008 at 3:06 pmInteresting idea, Dan. I guess the government has a right to use some tax money to communicate to the public how exactly the rest of their tax money is being spent. How much they spend on this or how they communicate is up for debate though.
I’m presuming you know for certain it’s taxpayers’ money and not party funds that are paying for the ad?
Comment by David Bowie | April 9, 2008 at 3:50 pmIf it was party funds it would be illegal as we don’t allow party political ads (or overtly religious ones) on the telly or radio outside of elections.
Comment by Dan Sullivan | April 9, 2008 at 4:59 pmLooking at the print ad of a child with Hard Hat holding up a sheet of ???(plans?), I’m thinking a child COULD actually do a better job of forward planning than the Dept. of Transport !
Comment by Bren L | April 10, 2008 at 6:40 amReplace the Civil Servants with a school load of children ! ( They’d produce better results upon the promise of an increase in pocket money!!)