What does AISRR stand for?
AISSR stands for the All-Island Strategic Rail Review, a report release in 2023 identifying key works to be undertaken to dramatically increase rail connectivity across the island of Ireland to get cars and lorries off roads.
Is it all bad news? Are there any improvements in the pipeline?
There is lots of good news, even now:
- Grand Central Station in Belfast will provide more capacity and allow the Dublin service to reach central Belfast
- Glider extensions are in the planning stages
- Lisburn Train stations surrounding railway towards Portadown and Antrim is being improved, apparently with provision for the Lisburn West station and the reopening of the link to Antrim
- Ticket machines are being installed at railway stations
- Integrated ticketing has become available from Irish Rail stations to France combining the Irish Ferries service
(There’s a full Projects page in the works to cover these and other developments)
Won’t restoring railway lines prevent the creation of Greenways?
There may be individual cases where for a stretch of right-of-way the choice between greenway and railway line has to be made. However, in general we believe the answer here is -No-, and in fact restoring rail can lead to further greenways, for the following reasons:
- Many original right-of-ways are not suitable for restoration for multiple reasons: the route is too indirect, the route is too narrow for double track and/or modern infrastructure, the route is too curved for suitably high speeds, or the route is blocked by buildings. As greenways require less space and have in general more flexible requires, there is no competition in this case. An excellent example is the proposed Banbridge to Scarva greenway. Although this link, on paper, could provide part of the AISRR-proposed diversionary route from Belfast towards Newry and Dublin, the route is narrow, circuitous and goes to Scarva rather than the (future) rail hub of Portadown and hence not suitable for use as part of a modern system.
- Clearing land for and re-building rail infrastructure can easily provide a path alongside for walkers and cyclists. The additional cost compared to a dedicated foot and cycle-path project would be minimal. This can become a standard part of all rail projects, leading to direct cycle links in places where greenways have not even been proposed.
- As part of the preparation process for rebuilding rail infrastructure, provisional cycle routes can be provided very quickly (e.g. with fine gravel), and put in permanent provision as part of the project.
Northern Ireland has a very good road network, with further improvements in the pipeline. Why spend all this money on expensive railways instead of just optimising and improving the bus network?
Buses are subject to all the same problems that car drivers have: traffic jams, reduced and highly variable speeds and danger from collisions. In all normal circumstances, rail eliminates all of these problems. A single train, depending on length, can carry hundreds and hundred of people. A single bus may have a maximum of around 60. Both vehicles require only one driver, although a train may in addition have a number of other staff, the number of employees required per passenger is lower. Furthermore there is, for better or worse, a psychological aspect: passengers are more likely to switch to public transport if a tram or rail service is provide. This may not be an entirely subjective decision, given the advantages listed above.
Northern Ireland has a small population of under 2 million people spread out unevenly and in parts at a very low density. Do we really need better public transport, or even long-distance public transport at all?
A look at Belfast’s traffic in the mornings and the evenings will tell you something has to change. The motorways and motorway junctions around Belfast are not much better. The traffic in Belfast and other cities is coming from somewhere, and it is often further afield than within the cities themselves. There is no doubt that an improved network has to be centred around the urban centres: Belfast, Derry-Londonderry, Newry and Portadown. Exactly this is is at the centre of what is being proposed and what is must come first. However, if the vision is to provide an alternative to energy-intensive, polluting cars and lorries (and both of those adjectives still apply to electric vehicles, unfortunately) we also need to provide links to rural areas. This can be achieved with light rail links with small autonomous vehicles or bus- and taxi-on demand services. The key here is not to spend millions and millions on over-dimensioned infrastructure but to make the system easy, reliable and affordable to use.
OK, modern public transport would be nice, but shouldn’t we also sort out the problems we have on our roads, right now?
This is a difficult question. There is no doubt that for many journeys, public transport doesn’t provide an attractive alternative right now and this will take some years until that changes. And bus users also suffer from heavy road traffic and delays caused by accidents. In the very short term, that might speak for capacity and safety improvements. However, we also have to prioritise and accept the mess we are in. We need to look for quick wins, for example bike paths, reopening the Lisburn to Antrim line with a spur to airport, moving Sydenham station to be at the City Airport, extending the Glider to Derriaghy rail halt, building the Sailortown to Titanic Quarter bridge, park and ride wherever we can provide it and more frequent bus and glider services on dedicated lanes. Anything that can get cars off the roads as quickly as possible. If at the same time we build new infrastructure in the quickest, most straightforward way possible (for example using single tracks and level crossings at first while building double track rail alongside using bridges and tunnels) we may be able to achieve the “circuit-breaker” needed to get out of the mess we are in. One other point is that simplified flyovers and tunnels that are only for bus (with passive tram/rail provision for the future) will obviously be cheaper than larger, multilane road projects. The “pull-effect” of a driver stuck in traffic seeing a frequent bus service speeding above might be very big indeed!
Why will this all take so long? The timescales mentioned in the AISRR are in terms of many years and decades.
On one level, there are a lot of factors that prevent “reopening” older railways lines. Reopening is in most cases (Lisburn to Antrim being one exception) not even feasible: the track is gone, the stations sold and the right-of-way blocked by new buildings. Restoring or rebuilding would be a better word.
Nevertheless, we support opening new routes sooner rather than later and with basic infrastructure (single track with passing loops, level crossings) at first and enhancements to come later. This can be particularly applied to Lisburn to Antrim, where the track is still intact but the passing loops have been removed, and Portadown to Armagh, where the right-of-way is mostly free of incursions. Lisburn to Antrim may need a shuttle bus with good provision for luggage at first until a spur to the airport and new station can be built.
Can we make ticketing less expensive and less complicated?
Northern Ireland has a multitude of travel cards and non-existent integration between bus and rail for single journeys. Ticket machines exist only for Glider, but are on the way for rail. The most simple and affordable scheme, iLink, is more or less centred around Belfast with some provision for Derry-Londonderry as an afterthought. We do not need massive investment for a new, complicated system, we need to reform iLink to reflect multiple urban centres and also reflect what options people have right now. As a simple example, an iLink card should be possible for the Omagh area, as not everyone in Omagh wants to regularly commute to Belfast or perhaps anywhere at all, they just want to get around. Such a card can also not cost the same as for the same area in and around Belfast until comparable, high-quality, frequent service exists around Omagh.
Northern Ireland has massive financial problems. How in the world can we afford all this?
Northern Ireland does have massive financial problems. However, almost everyone would agree that it also has massive problems in financial management, competence and good governance in general. However, if we let the point stand, that there is no money or indeed a large debt in the state bank account, we need to examine how and why large infrastructure projects are funded. It is agreed by most economists, of all shades, that money spent on infrastructure investment is money well spent. Providing affordable transportation links increases mobility which provides a more flexible and available workforce. Companies profit from better labour-availability, workers profit from better wages as they can get to better paid jobs. Investment follows the virtuous cycle continues. For the government this means increased tax revenues from company and income tax and decreased expenditure on the social safety net because people need less financial support. All of this means borrowing money for such projects is a sound decision and access to finance for such projects by governments is easy.
There are also three simpler points:
- For decades, we have managed to find the money for massive road building projects and road widening schemes. If we reduce the demands on the roads, we can also stop the never-ending cycle of road building.
- The Republic of Ireland (that has been investing in all sorts of new infrastructure for many years) is currently doing very well financially and has offered to pay for 25% of the works in Northern Ireland proposed in the AISRR.
- Larger businesses and housing developers can cover some of the costs, there are many examples of this model from around the world.