Rural Transport in Ireland – Overview Presentation to the Irish Planning Institute

1. Rural Transport in Ireland – Overview • Presentation to the Irish Planning Institute • 28th January 2004

2. RURAL TRANSPORT ANALYSIS – KEY DATES • Nov 2000 – Inter-departmental Working Group on Rural Transport • template for county rural transport audits and needs assessments • 4 counties – Kerry, Laois, Mayo and Westmeath – CDB-assisted • 2001/02 – all rural CDBscarry out audits and needs assessments • national database of 12,000 rural residents • Inter-departmental Committee on Rural Public Transport • reported December 2002 (www.transport.ie)

3. COMMITTEE’S TERMS OF REFERENCE • “To prepare for the Minister for Transport and the Government a • policy paper with recommendations on the future provision of public • transport in rural areas which addressed the policy issues involved, having • regard to the following: • views of the Public Transport Partnership Forum on rural transport policy; • the committee’s assessment of the audit of rural public transport services and assessment of public transport needs by County Development Boards in each county from a nation-wide perspective;

4. COMMITTEE’S TERMS OF REFERENCE Contd. • the linkage between the provision of transport services and issues of sustainable development in rural Ireland, e.g. avoidance of increased commuting, environment impacts and spatial planning generally; • experience to date as regards rural transport services operated by Bus Éireann and other transport operators and community and voluntary initiatives relating to provision of transport in rural areas; • the current examination of the regulation of bus services outside the Greater Dublin Area being undertaken by the Minister for Public Enterprise”.

5. KEY FINDINGS – ROLE OF PRIVATE CARS • 90% of rural households have at least one car, 10% have no car • 83% “always” or “frequently” have a car available • 17% “never” or “rarely” have a car available • Those who “always/frequently” have cars make more weekly trips • Key affected groups: older people, women, low incomes, mobility impaired

6. KEY FINDINGS – ROLE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT • Usage higher among those who “rarely/never” have a car • Of modes, mainly bus travel is used • Nature of rural bus market: low car availability (65%), young (40%), older people (25%), women (60%), low income (50%+) • 55% of rural DEDs have some level of scheduled public transport (bus/rail), 45% do not

7. KEY FINDINGS – PERCEIVED UNMET NEEDS • 76% of respondents report no unmet needs, 24% do 50.00% 45.00% 40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 65+ Female Illness/Disability Low Income 65+ All 18-24 All Female 65+ Male

8. Purpose Destination Work Shopping Leisure Medical County Town Other Large (>5,000) Education Visiting Friends Other Medium (1,500-4,999) Small (<1,500) Other KEY FINDINGS – WHERE PEOPLE WISH TO GO • 1-2 extra trips on average

9. RURAL TRANSPORT POLICY – CHALLENGES • Distinctive nature and requirements • Diversity and heterogeneity • Need to link with other evolving policies • Variety of schemes already operating • Limited experience in relation to non-conventional modes • Difficulties of predicting levels of patronage and cost

10. PROPOSED OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS Objective Target “To develop a more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable approach to transport and settlement patterns in rural areas, via increased use of public transport” Minimum weekly daytime scheduled services between county/large towns and other towns in the county, with a gradual build-up to daily morning/evening services “To ensure that, irrespective of car ownership or availability, rural residents are able to make regular (independent) trips” Minimum weekly service combining scheduled and non-scheduled elements, with priority for people in vulnerable groups with unmet needs

11. OPTIONS • Scheduled approach • Non-conventional approach • “Collect and connect” approach

12. “COLLECT AND CONNECT”

13. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES DoT lead Department: • policy • regulation • funding • Community/voluntary: • continued national/local roles • RTI sponsors • stimulate/support scheduled • organise the non-scheduled Other Departments: • DES re school transport • DHC re health-related • DSFA re Free Travel Scheme • DoEHLG re taxi/hackney, local authorities • Sub-national element: • local authority role • regional/local transport planning units? • subject to OGDA outcome

14. COST ESTIMATES • Per pilot county • Weekly service for priority target groups only, where there is no car and no existing public transport • €600,000 p.a. per county (mainly subvention, also admin, infrastructure) • Subject to outcome of a pilot phase

15. RURAL TRANSPORT AND SPATIAL PLANNING • Short-term: • increased local authority involvement • more coherent exercising of existing functions • add transport to County Development Plans • Medium-term: • dispersed population a transport and settlement challenge • build up rural towns and villages • National Spatial Strategy