On 2 Mar, 21:41, Mizter T wrote:
I'm minded to think that the push by Passenger Focus et al (but
notably not London Travlwatch, AFAIAA) for a proper 'parly' service
might possibly end up having negative repercussions - whilst the quasi-
enthusiast Adonis (who's done much good, I don't doubt that) decreed
to his DfT Rail servants that a train service shall run, I'm guessing
in part because he saw that as being a legal requirement [1], I can't
help but think the new mob of Cameron, Osbourne & co. won't be too
enamoured by such profligacy - and if the advice comes back that it's
required by law, then they might just change that law, and not just
the bit about route closures - think other elements of today's
railways that enjoy legislative protection as well, e.g. regulated
fares.

I agree but I bet the cost of running this service is small compared with
the leasing cost of the SET 508s that don't carry any passengers. I have
written to DFT and the rail regulator and neither showed any interest. It
seems that wasting money is of no concern to the government. Presumably this
way they can claim that there is no spare rolling stock. If it's leased then
it's not spare!

John