A letter from Michael O'Leary: ‘MetroLink is a mad, bad project'
Being criticised by Irish Times columnists is always a great compliment. In what crazy country could we seriously consider wasting approximately €20 billion of taxpayer money on a railway line, serving a narrow strip of the north Dublin population from Swords to St Stephen's Green, all of whom are well served currently by bus connections? The cost/benefit of this insanity has never been published, because it cannot be justified.
Dermot Desmond's transport view should carry significant weight, given his very successful rescue, redevelopment and sale of London City Airport for approximately $1 billion in 2006.
My own, (less?) humble view is based on almost 40 years' experience of growing, what is now the world's largest passenger airline.
READ MORE
But sadly we are both guilty of 'being rich', so therefore dismissed by The Irish Times 'experts', who know so much more about transport.
I wouldn't quibble with a MetroLink from Swords to St Stephen's Green if it was free, but there are far better uses of taxpayer funds, than this white elephant.
Muddled thinking, free of any cost/benefit analysis, such as that displayed by Justine McCarthy, is how you deliver a children's hospital (which should have cost €200 million) at a final cost of €2.5 billion and rising.
My criticism of the MetroLink is based on the fact, that very few passengers at Dublin Airport will ever use it.
It takes passengers into St Stephen's Green, so some small minority of inbound visitors might use it, but the vast majority of Irish originating passengers, who need to get to Dublin Airport early in the morning, or are travelling to/from outside the D2 / D4 area, won't use it.
Dublin Airport is just 9km from the centre of the city, and is well served by competitively priced bus connections, which takes passengers to the city centre, and to points all over Ireland at low fares. These passengers won't switch to a €20 billion metro.
Your columnist claims that I 'opposed the second terminal at Dublin Airport in 2010. I didn't. Dublin needed a second terminal l and I offered to build it on the North Apron for just €200 million, as Ryanair had proposed. I simply pointed out that the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA), wasted €2 billion, building Terminal 2 in the wrong place (a cul-de-sac) and with no ability to future expand.
Now that the second runway has opened on the north apron, the chronic congestion in the T2 cul-de-sac bedevils the T2 airlines on a daily basis.
I note Ms McCarthy failed to offer her opinion on the Dublin Airport second runway (a project which I also supported), yet which the airlines and our passengers are prevented from using, by a 2007 (Road Traffic) Planning restriction.
We elected a new government last November which promised to remove this cap 'as soon as possible', which would enable the airlines at Dublin to grow traffic, new routes, tourism and jobs.
Sadly, eight months later the Government has failed to take any action to scrap this cap. More inexcusable delay and inaction from our political class.
To summarise, both I and Dermot Desmond believe, wasting €20 billion on a Dublin Airport metro, is an unjustifiable waste of scarce taxpayer funds. I object because the majority of Dublin Airport passengers won't ever use this vastly overpriced service.
Dermot correctly suggests that Al and electric road transport will solve the problem at a fraction of this €20 billion over the next decade.
The fact that an unqualified Irish Times columnist considers that 'two rich men' are wrong, only renews my faith that this MetroLink is a mad, bad project.
Add some more buses to service the citizens of Swords, Ballymun, Collins Avenue, and Glasnevin, and The Irish Times could save Irish taxpayers (me included!) about €19.9 billion rather than squandering these funds, as we have on the world's most expensive, and least efficient, Children's Hospital.
If the next time Ms McCarthy wants to offer an opinion on government transport projects, perhaps she could address the cost benefit of the project, rather than slagging off two successful – albeit opinionated – business people.
We won't always be right, but we will be right, far more often than the misguided, anti-business Irish Times 'chatterati'. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL O'LEARY.
Chief Executive,
Ryanair,
Dublin.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
8 hours ago
- Irish Times
Letters to the Editor, August14th: On MetroLink arguments, calling time on the Angelus, and immigrants and jobs
Sir, – In response to Michael O'Leary's letter (August 13th) he makes very valid points about cost- analysis when progressing with a substantial investment such as MetroLink. However, using his own logic on the unsuitability of Irish Times columnists to comment on transport projects, I would posit it's unlikely he's speaking from personal experience about public transport. His assertion that the airport is 'well served' by bus connections is simply not true. Passengers often have to wait and queue for long periods of time to access services into the city centre at peak times. Several times I have tried to board connections in the city centre to take me to the airport only to be told by the drivers that their buses are full – try explaining the lack of transport options to German or French travellers similarly marooned at Customs House Quay, worried that they may miss their flights. READ MORE The truth is that the travel connections to and from Dublin Airport fall woefully short of that which is available in most other European cities. Shovelling a few million more passengers through the airport, as Mr O'Leary also suggests, without tackling this key issue first, will only exacerbate this national embarrassment. – Yours, etc, DAVID CLARKE, Edinburgh, Scotland. Sir, – Michael O'Leary paints MetroLink as an overpriced airport shuttle (Letters, April 13th). It's not. It will link 15 stations, 127 schools, three universities, five hospitals, and put over 175,000 people and 250,000 jobs within walking distance of a stop. With only about 18 per cent of passengers expected to use the airport station, its real value lies in serving as a clean and efficient transport backbone for Dublin's growing population. – Yours, etc, Dr CIARÁN O'CARROLL, Lecturer in Sustainability, TU Dublin. Sir, – Yes. We do not need a metro to the airport. I travel to Dublin by train, get the Luas into town and get the 16 or 41 bus to the airport from the city centre. Great service. I could also get the airport bus from Heuston Station to the airport every 15 minutes or so. Possibly the bus service could be expanded with better buses and with more frequency. Of course, Paddy wants to drive to the airport, and would drive into the bag drop area if allowed. Maybe better links to Cork and Shannon should be considered, possibly a train or metro directly to these airports as it would be easier to build. Imagine trying to build a metro to Dublin Airport now that the area is fully built up. Even upgrading the existing rail network across Ireland to the cities would make sense. Why does the world evolve around Dublin people? The rest of the country deserves the same attention. Michael O'Leary is correct. – Yours, etc, TREVOR MOORE, Co Carlow. Sir, – Michael O'Leary does not have 'humble' opinions. In fact, his opinions are quite the opposite. – Yours, etc, SHEA CARROLL , Dublin 8. Sir, – Regarding Justine McCartney's support for building the MetroLink ('Michael O'Leary and Dermot Desmond's MetroLink comments show you can be rich and wrong,' August 8th), may I suggest that criticism of this stance by multimillionaire airline chiefs currently desperate to abolish passenger caps, increasing fossil fuel consumption, is a great compliment? – Yours, etc, ROBERT WALSH, Fulham, London. Sir, – I read a letter in today's Irish Times by a certain Michael O'Leary. I simply thought if only more could think like that, we might be in a better place. – Yours, etc, ANTAINE O'DUIBHIR, Ranelagh, Dublin 6. Sir, – Michael O'Leary's letter was an entertaining read. Please give him his own column. – Yours, etc, SADHBH NÍ SEACHNASAIGH, Galway. Is time up for the Angelus? Sir, – Isn't it time to remove the Angelus from RTÉ's airwaves? Friday is the 75th anniversary of the first broadcast on Radio Éireann. A lot has changed in Ireland since 1950, and the Angelus has run its course. It may have been revamped a few times in recent years, but these efforts have been the last sting of a dying wasp. At its best the Angelus is one minute less advertising. At its worst it is 60 seconds of repetitive sound. Ultimately, though, the Angelus is a throwback to a bygone era, to the stern religious society of the past. It does not ring true in the Ireland of 2025. The removal of the Angelus may be denounced as 'cancel culture' by some. But many others wouldn't even notice its absence. And that speaks volumes. – Yours, etc, WILLIAM BURKE, Blackrock, Cork. Reporting Gaza death tolls Sir, – A recent letter (August 12th) questioning why CNN and Channel 4 no longer add 'Hamas-controlled' to mentions of the health ministry in Gaza does itself a disservice in raising misdirected concerns. It notes 'it is a matter of established fact' that the health ministry is run by Hamas officials, but it too is an established fact that the figures they present are reliable. Gaza's health ministry – which is part of the Palestinian Ministry of Health, encompassing both Gaza and the Palestinian Authority (PA) – has proven largely accurate in tallying Palestinian death tolls in conflicts over the past 17 years, and its data is used by the UN and others, including both the US and Israel. Throughout the current Israeli bombardment, the health ministry has regularly released lists of the full names (which include both the deceased's father and grandfather's names), ID numbers and addresses of the victims of the conflict. However, the letter writer is correct in questioning the acceptance of these figures as the 'full and unvarnished truth' in light of the several studies showing that they are likely a gross undercount. The Lancet estimated in February 70,000 deaths from traumatic injuries in the first year of the conflict alone, and a June study by researchers from the University of London, Princeton and Stanford estimated 75,200 war-related deaths up to January 2025. It is also worth noting that the health ministry figures count only those killed by bombs or bullets who are registered in hospitals, and not those under the rubble, or cut off from emergency services, nor those who have died and will die from other causes related to Israel's blockade of food and medical supplies, and its destruction of the health system. On the subject of clarifications, it may be more pertinent to call for prefixing the pronouncements of the Israeli government with a descriptor such as 'war-crimes accused', or a caveat that human rights groups, from Amnesty to Israel's B'Tselem, UN experts, lawyers and genocide scholars have determined it is likely conducting a genocide. Noting the Israeli government's record of false statements about its killing of journalists, emergency workers, or its bombing of hospitals could also be useful when featuring its quotes. And rather than worrying about the accuracy of these figures, one should perhaps wonder in what other conflict in which a side has killed more than 60,000 people – including over 230 journalists, 400 aid workers and 18,000 children, and 168 people have died of malnutrition as a result of the purposeful starving of the trapped population – would a person be more concerned with casting doubt on death tolls than putting a stop to them. – Yours, etc, CHRISTINE MAGUIRE, Whitehall, Dublin 9. School holidays Sir, – Having read 'The Debate: Are school holidays too long?' (August 12th), it crossed my mind that it is always teachers who think that the school holidays are not too long. I wonder why? – Yours, etc, JOHN WALSH, Shannon, Co Clare. Immigrants and jobs Sir, – Fintan O'Toole reminds us of where we were as emigrants and where we are today as an immigrant nation (' We in Ireland forget how recently we were the 'crap-job' migrants ', August 12th). We should treat immigrants in Ireland with the protections we hope for Irish emigrants wherever. Is there no intergenerational memory? – Yours, etc, BOBBY GILMORE SSC, (Director of Irish Emigrant Chaplaincy 1978-92), Navan, Co Meath. Sir, – Each morning on my daily walk I meet an elderly Irish man with a walking stick being led by his carer from Peru. They strike me as having a respectful and caring relationship and without the carer he could not take a walk. Fintan O'Toole refers to this job as 'crap'. Meaning worthless. While I do agree with most of his views and consider him a gifted writer with an extensive vocabulary, I am greatly disappointed with his choice of the word crap. I agree that these jobs are low paid and mostly done by foreigners, but it is an insult to refer to them in this way. I do hope none of these foreigners read The Irish Times to discover how 'worthless' their jobs are. If this were a report card. I would say 'could do better'. – Yours, etc, KATHLEEN FORDE, Whitehall, Dublin 9. Sir, – Fintan O'Toole brilliantly summarises the immigrant dilemma. I look forward to seeing Conor McGregor and his friends serving me my burgers and delivering my next pizza when they fulfil their 'Ireland for the Irish'. In the meantime, I appreciate all the contributions of those who have chosen to make Ireland their home. – Yours, etc, TONY HAMILL, Stillorgan, Co Dublin. Camogie bogey Sir, – Having spent last Sunday at Croke Park, I agree with Dermot Ashmore's complimentary observations on the merits of camogie (Letters, August 12th). However, the referee's insistence on whistling when the sliotar crosses the endline, sideline and then blowing again to restart play was infuriating. Let them play. – Yours, etc, DENISE McCARTHY, Drumcondra, Dublin 9. Horse show coverage Sir, – The coverage in your paper, and indeed other Irish media outlets, of the Irish Horse Show is disproportionately small compared with that given to English sporting events. This is despite the fact that we have the best riders, the finest horses, and host one of the most prestigious competitions in the world. The Irish Horse Show warrants far more coverage in Ireland befitting its international standing. – Yours, etc, FIONA ANDERSON, Blackrock, Dublin. SUV survey Sir, – The debate about SUVs in the media, including in your Letters page, never tackles the definition of an SUV. I drive a modest car similar in size to many Nissans, Renaults and Volkswagens. It burns 4.5l/100 km (63mpg) which is half the fuel consumption of a 1950s Morris Minor. It fits into a standard parking space and its weight is about half that of a Range Rover. Finally, its height is only about 18cm more than the saloon equivalent. Yet my car is classified as an SUV alongside very large cars such as Range Rovers, Volvos and Porsches simply because it is a little higher than the saloon. Few people mention the advantage of an SUV which is that older people like me with mobility problems find entry and exit easier with a higher vehicle. I would wholeheartedly welcome an accurate and scientific means of determining whether a car is an SUV, and I would also welcome a taxation system for cars based on a combination of dimensions, weight, fuel consumption and pollution. – Yours, etc, MICHAEL HARRINGTON, Beara, Co Cork. Stalling infrastructure Sir, – Your editorial ('The Irish Times view on infrastructure delivery: radical solutions are needed,' August 11th) rightly highlights dysfunction in Ireland's infrastructure delivery, but its roots lie in a relentless focus on economic gains at the expense of social, environmental and legal commitments. Judicial reviews are not the problem; they are a symptom of this imbalance. Renewable energy policy is a case in point. Low ambition, weak policy, and disregard for best practice have made Ireland the slowest in the EU for project consents. Offshore wind has been stalled by departmental inefficiencies and failure to engage with legal and public concerns, ensuring years of further delay. This is not the fault of 'objectors' but of poor governance. It is time to move beyond the narrow economic mindset, stop pandering to foreign direct investment (FDI) interests, and deliver competent, lawful planning in the true national interest. – Yours, etc, MICHAEL O'MEARA, Fenor, Co Waterford. Is this a record? Sir – Your excellent world weather summary (August 12th) shows that 10 cities reached 100 degrees Fahrenheit or higher yesterday. This must (unquestionably) be a record! Don't tell Mr Trump. – Yours, etc, BRENDAN CASHELL, Co Louth. Sir, – Allow me to wade in. I have a yellow-skinned fleshy tuber in my possession. Is this a Record? – Yours, etc, JAMES KINSELLA, Arklow, Co Wicklow. Sir, – I note the current run of letters on records has been continuing for quite a while, perhaps longer than any previous times. If this is in fact the case, would that be a 'broken' record? – Yours, etc, DAVID DORAN, Bagenalstown, Co Carlow. Bowel screening Sir, – Reading the letter from Michael Gleeson on bowel screening (August 12th) reminds me that there is equality legislation in this country (Equal Status Act), the purpose of which is to prevent discrimination in the provision of goods and services against nine categories of people in our society. One of these categories is discrimination on the grounds of age . – Yours, etc, MARY DALY, Rathfarnham, Dublin.
Irish Times
12 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on climate policy: Government must avoid backsliding
Methane arising from agriculture and the fossil fuel industry is a notorious greenhouse gas, contributing significantly to global warming. While it breaks down relatively quickly in the atmosphere – unlike carbon dioxide – it is a serious threat to climate stabilisation. The quicker it is reduced, the more global average temperatures can be cut. Much can be done to reduce methane releases in oil and gas production, but it is much more challenging in agriculture. Livestock exporting countries like Ireland and New Zealand are supporting a new approach to classifying methane which is gaining political traction. This is based around achieving national 'temperature neutrality', also known as 'no additional warming'. The Government has yet to take a formal position on the concept. Significantly it got the backing of the Climate Change Advisory Council, its key advisory body. It chose to interpret Ireland's legally-binding climate neutrality obligations in terms of temperature neutrality – rather than the more onerous target of 'net zero emissions'. An international study , published in the Environmental Research Letters journal this week, has questioned this approach. It says that it 'grandfathers high emissions from wealthy, livestock-exporting nations', shifts the burden of cutting emissions to others, and limits space for lower-income countries to grow food systems. The approach fails on food security grounds, with trade data showing most exports serve high-income markets. This risks locking in inequality and misses 'a critical opportunity to reduce peak warming'. READ MORE The most concerning finding was highlighted by lead researcher Dr Colm Duffy of the University of Galway: 'If every country adopted a temperature neutrality target, we'd seriously jeopardise the Paris agreement's goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees or even 2 degrees.' The Government is in a bind on this. How methane is regarded in policy terms has big implications for carbon budgets up to 2040, which must be signed off on soon. Climatologist Prof John Sweeney has argued that the shift, which reduces the required emissions reduction target, is not aligned with scientific recommendations and could hinder Ireland's ability to meet its climate goals. The study emphasises that governments must set targets that are internationally credible and farmers need to be supported within a national framework, rather than targeted for blame. The bottom line is that Ireland will not meet the global climate challenge by redefining climate targets. Ireland has yet to deliver an honest appraisal of what a genuinely climate-neutral, sustainable and resilient agricultural sector could look like in coming decades. Avoiding this issue would amount to backsliding on vital climate action.
Irish Times
14 hours ago
- Irish Times
European leaders eye Trump-Putin talks on Ukraine with anxiety
The further east you travel across Europe, the higher the anxiety levels are in national capitals about what US president Donald Trump might do when he meets Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. The terms of any future truce in Ukraine feel existential to EU states closer to Russia , more than the seemingly averted trade war between the European Union and the US does. Following Wednesday's online meeting with Mr Trump, European leaders were quick to put a positive spin on the outcome. German chancellor Friedrich Merz told reporters that Trump knows Europe's position and shares that 'extensively', while French president Emmanuel Macron said Trump will 'fight' for a trilateral meeting with both Putin and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy . READ MORE The reality, however, is that Zelenskiy has been kept out of the sit-down by Trump and Putin in Alaska, as have other European leaders, who fear Putin will use the opportunity to manoeuvre Trump into supporting a peace deal more favourable to Russia. France's president Emmanuel Macron, European Council president Antonio Costa, France's foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot and France's minister for the armed forces Sebastien Lecornu attend a video conference with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy and German chancellor Friedrich Merz on Wednesday. Photograph: Philippe Magoni/AFP/Getty The EU has tried and failed to get a seat at any table discussing the possible end of the war, which Russia started when it invaded Ukraine in early 2022. The Ukrainian president has done what he can to stay on Trump's good side and had seemed to convince the US president that Putin was the real obstacle to any ceasefire. [ Trump-Putin meeting: After months strengthening its hand, Ukraine is back to square one Opens in new window ] That was the message Zelenskiy and the leaders of Germany, France, the UK, Italy, Poland and Finland stressed in their video call with Trump on Wednesday. The big fear is that Trump will come out of the Alaska talks with the outline of a deal which sells Ukraine short in a bid to bring about a quick end to the conflict. Politically, Kyiv will surely not give up any territory held by Russian forces as the price of a shaky ceasefire alone. In a worst-case scenario, the White House could pressure Zelenskiy to make significant concessions by threatening to cut off vital support the US is providing to Ukraine, from weapons to battlefield intelligence. The Ukrainian leader would then be faced with accepting a bad deal, or fighting on without the help of the US. [ Zelenskiy says Trump promised postwar security guarantees for Ukraine Opens in new window ] Officials in Brussels are concerned that a truce on Russia's terms could undermine the future of Ukraine and, by extension, the security of Europe. Despite commitments to spend huge sums on defence over the coming years, Europe still relies on the security blanket Washington has provided for the Continent since the end of the second World War. The EU has bent over itself to keep the fraying transatlantic bond from breaking altogether. Ukraine could become the latest flashpoint in those tensions. German chancellor Friedrich Merz and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy attend a joint press conference following a virtual meeting hosted by Mr Merz between European leaders and US president Donald Trump in Berlin, Germany. Photograph: Omer Messinger/Getty 'It's not quite a case of panic; EU capitals are taking this very seriously, but let's see,' said one Brussels-based diplomat. 'There might be something that could come of this, some dynamic that might lead somewhere.' It is fair to say nobody really knows what to expect.
