|
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
Having seen the horrendousness that is the TFL fares section, I can't
tell if National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards are still available. My parents (one Senior Citizen railcard-holder and one Disabled Railcard-holder) are coming for their first trip to London for years. I don't want to have to educate them in how to use an Oyster card, when they know that you either show your paper Travelcard to the bus driver or put it through the gates at the tube station. Are the still National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards? |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
"Mark Morton" wrote in message ... Having seen the horrendousness that is the TFL fares section, I can't tell if National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards are still available. My parents (one Senior Citizen railcard-holder and one Disabled Railcard-holder) are coming for their first trip to London for years. I don't want to have to educate them in how to use an Oyster card, when they know that you either show your paper Travelcard to the bus driver or put it through the gates at the tube station. Are the still National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards? Yes Paul S |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Mar 30, 7:10*pm, Mark Morton wrote: Having seen the horrendousness that is the TFL fares section, I can't tell if National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards are still available. My parents (one Senior Citizen railcard-holder and one Disabled Railcard-holder) are coming for their first trip to London for years. *I don't want to have to educate them in how to use an Oyster card, when they know that you either show your paper Travelcard to the bus driver or put it through the gates at the tube station. Are [there] still National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards? Yes - the current cost of an inboundary zones 1-6 off-peak Day Travelcard is £5.00 - there's no discount for an inboundary Anytime (aka Peak) Day Travelcard. Whilst the TfL fares webpages don't mention the Railcard discount on Day Travelcards, it should be noted that no previous TfL (or indeed London Transport) fares publicity in previous years has ever made any mention of it either. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
|
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Mar 30, 9:39*pm, wrote: (Mizter T) wrote: On Mar 30, 7:10*pm, Mark Morton wrote: Having seen the horrendousness that is the TFL fares section, I can't tell if National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards are still available. My parents (one Senior Citizen railcard-holder and one Disabled Railcard-holder) are coming for their first trip to London for years. I don't want to have to educate them in how to use an Oyster card, when they know that you either show your paper Travelcard to the bus driver or put it through the gates at the tube station. Are [there] still National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards? Yes - the current cost of an inboundary zones 1-6 off-peak Day Travelcard is £5.00 - there's no discount for an inboundary Anytime (aka Peak) Day Travelcard. Whilst the TfL fares webpages don't mention the Railcard discount on Day Travelcards, it should be noted that no previous TfL (or indeed London Transport) fares publicity in previous years has ever made any mention of it either. Don't forget that their bus passes will allow them free bus travel at any time after 09:30. Aha, the ENCTS bus pass can actually be used *at any time* on London buses - TfL evidently made the decision to accept it 24 hours a day when the validity of the London Freedom Pass was extended around the clock on TfL services (though the morning peak restriction for Freedom Pass holders continues to apply on National Rail). See: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tickets/14305....kt-tab-panel-4 ---quote--- Concessionary bus passes from outside London If you've got a National Concessionary pass from an English council outside London you can use it at any time on buses in London displaying this[*] symbol. ---/quote--- [*] where the symbol is the red LT/ TfL roundel. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
mention of it either. Don't forget that their bus passes will allow them free bus travel at any time after 09:30. -- Colin Rosenstiel You have assumed that they have English bus passes, AIUI Wales and Scotland passes are NOT valid in England. Just as mine is not valid there! Peter |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
|
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
Mizter T wrote:
On Mar 30, 7:10 pm, Mark Morton wrote: Having seen the horrendousness that is the TFL fares section, I can't tell if National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards are still available. My parents (one Senior Citizen railcard-holder and one Disabled Railcard-holder) are coming for their first trip to London for years. I don't want to have to educate them in how to use an Oyster card, when they know that you either show your paper Travelcard to the bus driver or put it through the gates at the tube station. Are [there] still National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards? Yes - the current cost of an inboundary zones 1-6 off-peak Day Travelcard is £5.00 - there's no discount for an inboundary Anytime (aka Peak) Day Travelcard. Whilst the TfL fares webpages don't mention the Railcard discount on Day Travelcards, it should be noted that no previous TfL (or indeed London Transport) fares publicity in previous years has ever made any mention of it either. Thanks to those who have replied. It was on the old TFL fares section http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20100129133132/http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tickets/faresandtickets/oneand3daytickets/11696.aspx so that's why I was confused. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
Peter Andrews wrote:
You have assumed that they have English bus passes, AIUI Wales and Scotland passes are NOT valid in England. Just as mine is not valid there! Peter How sensible it would be to make those concessions reciprocal, so that English passes could be used in Wales and Scotland and vice-versa. Peter Beale (English holder of National Trust for Scotland membership, which works out cheaper than the English one, and can be used in England.) |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:27:46 +0100, Peter Beale
wrote: How sensible it would be to make those concessions reciprocal, so that English passes could be used in Wales and Scotland and vice-versa. Particularly if you live near the border of one of the countries. I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had to be devolved. It makes no sense to me. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
Ian Jelf wrote:
Some counties used to be quite flexible in their approach, allowing travel to and from major destinations outside their areas, while others (West Midlands/latterly Centro) had a much narrower definition, whereby pas validity absolutely stopped at the boundary. I don't know if it still applies (the guide I have is 1/08), and it is I suppose not strictly Centro/Network West Midlands, but on Travel Coventry/Travel West Midlands a Coventry Daysaver extended to Bedworth, Kenilworth, Leamington Spa, Balsall Common and Meriden. Peter Beale |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Mar 31, 12:53*pm, Ian Jelf wrote: In message , Neil Williams writes [snip] I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had to be devolved. *It makes no sense to me. No, nor to me. Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. I'd have regional assemblies across England, but that won't happen for a generation now. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 05:45:23 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote: Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. I'd have regional assemblies across England, but that won't happen for a generation now. It doesn't make for better implementation of any national scheme, though. The needs for free travel didn't differ between England, Wales, Scotland or even Northern Ireland. It would therefore have made sense for it to occur across the UK, or for there to at the very least be cross validity between the schemes. And IMO regional assemblies over and above the current Counties are an utter waste of money, unless you also remove a level of government (e.g. by abolishing counties themselves and replacing them with unitary authorities the size of a couple of boroughs). Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Mar 31, 5:22*pm, Neil Williams wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 05:45:23 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. I'd have regional assemblies across England, but that won't happen for a generation now. It doesn't make for better implementation of any national scheme, though. *The needs for free travel didn't differ between England, Wales, Scotland or even Northern Ireland. *It would therefore have made sense for it to occur across the UK, or for there to at the very least be cross validity between the schemes. It's a national scheme for England - feel free to argue at will over the status of England as a nation (indeed the status of Scotland, Wales and NI - the latter two in particular!). The point is that transport issues were devolved to the relevant institutions in those three nations/ regions/ whatever you want to call them. They call the shots within their jurisdictions. The ENCTS is just that - for England. I don't see why it somehow inherently makes sense for it to be a UK- wide scheme, as you seem to suggest. Anyway, the nature of devolution means that there won't be a UK-wide scheme - Parliament only deals with such matters the territory of England. (Again, feel free to pontificate about a UK Parliament that only has powers w.r.t. some fields in England only, in others in England & Wales, in others NI as well, and in others across the whole of the UK - that's the current constitutional settlement we have. Some can't stand the supposed illogicality and messiness of it all - I secretly kinda quite enjoy watching people getting all het up over it, because reality is indeed messy and illogical!) There could be cross-validity between the schemes if the various institutions came to an agreement with each other - given the differing funding methods that seems unlikely. And IMO regional assemblies over and above the current Counties are an utter waste of money, unless you also remove a level of government (e.g. by abolishing counties themselves and replacing them with unitary authorities the size of a couple of boroughs). Having a single tier of local government was *exactly* what was proposed for the North East. Also, the whole beauty of it would be wresting various powers away from distant Westminster and Whitehall to somewhere closer to home. It'd be a far better way of doing things than an English Parliament, IMHO (which is how some would 'solve' the 'problem' of lopsided devolution in the UK). |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote: I don't see why it somehow inherently makes sense for it to be a UK- wide scheme, as you seem to suggest. I think it makes more sense than it being by somewhat arbitrarily-delimited[1] countries, especially in the case of Wales (given the the Borders region between England and Scotland doesn't contain fairly large conurbations in the way that it does with Wales). [1] In real terms. Many people live in north Wales but carry on business in Chester, say. They might want to use their free travel there. Anyway, the nature of devolution means that there won't be a UK-wide scheme - Parliament only deals with such matters the territory of England. (Again, feel free to pontificate about a UK Parliament that only has powers w.r.t. some fields in England only, in others in England & Wales, in others NI as well, and in others across the whole of the UK - that's the current constitutional settlement we have. I don't call it pontification, I call it political debate. Having a single tier of local government was *exactly* what was proposed for the North East. Also, the whole beauty of it would be wresting various powers away from distant Westminster and Whitehall to somewhere closer to home. It'd be a far better way of doing things than an English Parliament, IMHO (which is how some would 'solve' the 'problem' of lopsided devolution in the UK). Though we should be careful not to devolve things like providing local public transport services to such bodies. We'd end up with the silly situations that exist in, say, Germany, France and Switzerland, where local services stop at the border even where this makes no sense whatsoever. We're better, IMO, with our quasi-national system whereby local authorities can add funding but don't control the entire service. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
"Neil Williams" wrote in message ... On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:27:46 +0100, Peter Beale wrote: How sensible it would be to make those concessions reciprocal, so that English passes could be used in Wales and Scotland and vice-versa. Particularly if you live near the border of one of the countries. I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had to be devolved. because "they" wanted it to be! tim |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Mizter T wrote:
On Mar 31, 12:53*pm, Ian Jelf wrote: In message , Neil Williams writes [snip] I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had to be devolved. *It makes no sense to me. No, nor to me. Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. Why, and could you supply examples? Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and make it once. tom -- I have been trying to find a way of framing this but yes, a light meal is probably preferable to a heavy one under the circumstances. -- ninebelow |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
Tom Anderson wr
Why, and could you supply examples? Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and make it once. Assuming that the right decision is the same one no matter where you are looking from. Not really a very sensible assumption. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On 31/03/2010 17:22, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 05:45:23 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. I'd have regional assemblies across England, but that won't happen for a generation now. It doesn't make for better implementation of any national scheme, though. But it is still what happens if you have devolution, whether it is sensible, optimal or or not. Personally I'm not convinced that old people should be able to commute to work for free, but that's just me being younger than them. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 22:54:53 +0100, Arthur Figgis
wrote: Personally I'm not convinced that old people should be able to commute to work for free, but that's just me being younger than them. They probably shouldn't, which I guess is why it has peak time exclusions in much of England. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Mar 31, 9:54*pm, Tom Anderson wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Mizter T wrote: On Mar 31, 12:53*pm, Ian Jelf wrote: In message , Neil Williams writes [snip] I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had to be devolved. *It makes no sense to me. No, nor to me. Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. Why, and could you supply examples? Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and make it once. You serious? That's a pretty technocratic and rather unwordly way of looking at things, if I may say. By extension you'd have a single European or even world government. Also, do you disapprove of any local governance, such as the GLSA arranegements? Apart from anything else, devolution in Scotland had pretty much become a political necessity - the clamour for it had grown so strong over the preceding years. And in Northern Ireland, whilst the story is very different, again it's pretty much a political necessity to have devolution arrangements in order for any progress to be made. The picture in Wales is like as clear cut.nothing like as clear cut. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Mar 31, 6:49*pm, Neil Williams wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: I don't see why it somehow inherently makes sense for it to be a UK- wide scheme, as you seem to suggest. I think it makes more sense than it being by somewhat arbitrarily-delimited[1] countries, especially in the case of Wales (given the the Borders region between England and Scotland doesn't contain fairly large conurbations in the way that it does with Wales). [1] In real terms. *Many people live in north Wales but carry on business in Chester, say. *They might want to use their free travel there. You can say the UK's internal borders are arbitrarily-delimited if you wish, but there's a whole lot of history to it all. And if there are lines then they have to get drawn somewhere. Anyway, the nature of devolution means that there won't be a UK-wide scheme - Parliament only deals with such matters the territory of England. (Again, feel free to pontificate about a UK Parliament that only has powers w.r.t. some fields in England only, in others in England & Wales, in others NI as well, and in others across the whole of the UK - that's the current constitutional settlement we have. I don't call it pontification, I call it political debate. Same thing. Having a single tier of local government was *exactly* what was proposed for the North East. Also, the whole beauty of it would be wresting various powers away from distant Westminster and Whitehall to somewhere closer to home. It'd be a far better way of doing things than an English Parliament, IMHO (which is how some would 'solve' the 'problem' of lopsided devolution in the UK). Though we should be careful not to devolve things like providing local public transport services to such bodies. *We'd end up with the silly situations that exist in, say, Germany, France and Switzerland, where local services stop at the border even where this makes no sense whatsoever. *We're better, IMO, with our quasi-national system whereby local authorities can add funding but don't control the entire service. Wow - you're proposing that *local* transport issues should not be devolved to *regional* bodies? Sorry, but I just can't get down with that at all whatsoever! Devolution is all about getting those powers closer to the people - the further away many of these powers and decisions are from Westminster and Whitehall and the centre, and the closer they are to the people and places they apply to, the better in my reckoning. In my 'fantasy constitution' (don't worry, it's not like a whole other mythical type world!) I'd have regional assemblies across England - and I suppose they'd be the ones with responsibility for local transport (along with some arrangement with the local authorities I guess). There could be certain incentives built in (by UK Parliament/ government) for co-operation on cross-regional services. And the regions could offer free bus travel to senior citizens if they wanted to - whether that would extend beyond their region would be up to them to decide and work out. But I digress into the world of make- believe... and anyway the free local bus travel in England genie is out of the bottle, and with the ever greyer electorate no-one's about to take it away from them!. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
Mizter T wrote:
I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had to be devolved. It makes no sense to me. No, nor to me. Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. One of the things devolutionists have never easily addressed is what happens to service provision in border areas - whereas the Scottish border is relatively unpopulated, there's a lot of people along the Welsh border for whom Welsh only/all provision within Wales is not the best situation. I have often wondered what kind of mess the London Mayor & Assembly can get up to if they get many more powers - originally coming from Epsom in the strip between the GLA boundary and the M25 it's particularly worrying when London politicians start proposing congestion charging within the entire M25 (and even just within the boundary would be messy, especially around Chessington where decades of road planning have worked on the basis that there'll be no barrier to crossing it). I cannot imagine how healthcare would be easily devolved. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:54:29 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote: You can say the UK's internal borders are arbitrarily-delimited if you wish, but there's a whole lot of history to it all. And if there are lines then they have to get drawn somewhere. My view is that no line needed drawing in the context of public transport concessionary fares, i.e. that it would have made more sense remaining a whole-UK matter. Wow - you're proposing that *local* transport issues should not be devolved to *regional* bodies? Indeed, where it applies to rail, as it creates a broken and insular network. I'd give the bodies the right to fund service increases, but not to fully control what is there. There could be certain incentives built in (by UK Parliament/ government) for co-operation on cross-regional services. You'll still end up with the German/Swiss/French mess. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 00:06:25 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote: I cannot imagine how healthcare would be easily devolved. Isn't NHS Scotland a separate organisation to NHS England? But even then, I suppose a region is too small. I think that could only be devolved effectively if we went to a more European-style insurance based system rather than a monolithic NHS as we have at present, which only really works *because* of its size. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To reply put my first name before the at. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Eric wrote:
Tom Anderson wr Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and make it once. Assuming that the right decision is the same one no matter where you are looking from. Not really a very sensible assumption. The right decision might be "X in Scotland, Y in England and Wales, and Q in Berwick". That decision could be made nationally; you don't need devolution to do that. Or do you mean that in England, they might think "X all over the UK" was best, and in Scotland, "Y all over the UK" was best? I'm not impressed by that case - it doesn't matter what people think, it matters what's best, so let's just do that. tom -- Damn the Solar System. Bad light; planets too distant; pestered with comets; feeble contrivance; could make a better myself. -- Francis Jeffery |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Mizter T wrote:
On Mar 31, 9:54*pm, Tom Anderson wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Mizter T wrote: On Mar 31, 12:53*pm, Ian Jelf wrote: In message , Neil Williams writes [snip] I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had to be devolved. *It makes no sense to me. No, nor to me. Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and Wales. It makes for better government. Why, and could you supply examples? Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and make it once. You serious? That's a pretty technocratic No, it's *entirely* technocratic. and rather unwordly way of looking at things, if I may say. By extension you'd have a single European or even world government. Yup, seems sensible. Also, do you disapprove of any local governance, such as the GLSA arranegements? Local government - at any level, from village to continent - is a useful optimisation, if there are decisions that need to be made that are purely local. But i don't see the point in taking decisions which could be made at a higher level and arbitrarily splitting them up to be decided locally. Apart from anything else, devolution in Scotland had pretty much become a political necessity - the clamour for it had grown so strong over the preceding years. Yup. People love it. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. And in Northern Ireland, whilst the story is very different, again it's pretty much a political necessity to have devolution arrangements in order for any progress to be made. The picture in Wales is like as clear cut.nothing like as clear cut. Ditto. tom -- Damn the Solar System. Bad light; planets too distant; pestered with comets; feeble contrivance; could make a better myself. -- Francis Jeffery |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:54:29 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: You can say the UK's internal borders are arbitrarily-delimited if you wish, but there's a whole lot of history to it all. And if there are lines then they have to get drawn somewhere. My view is that no line needed drawing in the context of public transport concessionary fares, i.e. that it would have made more sense remaining a whole-UK matter. Wow - you're proposing that *local* transport issues should not be devolved to *regional* bodies? Indeed, where it applies to rail, as it creates a broken and insular network. I'd give the bodies the right to fund service increases, but not to fully control what is there. Rail transport across the Hudson river in America is a good example of this. You've got the state of New Jersey on one side, and the state of New York (in the shape of Manhattan) on the other. Huge numbers of people commute from New Jersey into New York. You have a dense subway network on the New York side, with no projection into New Jersey. You have a decent regional rail network on the New Jersey side, with just one projection into New York, where it gets to a terminal at Pennsylvania Station and stops dead. The only network with multiple stops on both sides is the Port Authority Trans-Hudson network, which only exists precisely because there is a cross-regional authority here, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which has a sphere of interest on both banks of the Hudson. But because it is thus limited, that network doesn't extend far inland from either bank! tom -- Damn the Solar System. Bad light; planets too distant; pestered with comets; feeble contrivance; could make a better myself. -- Francis Jeffery |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
Neil Williams wrote:
I cannot imagine how healthcare would be easily devolved. Isn't NHS Scotland a separate organisation to NHS England? Yes, ditto Wales & Northern Ireland. There have been some problems with this set-up for Wales because there's a lot of people for whom the nearest hospital is on the other side of the border, hence problems with accountability. But I had in mind devolving healthcare in England where a lot of the regional boundaries are arbitary and some are straddled by health trusts and the like, especially around London. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On 2010-04-01, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Eric wrote: Tom Anderson wr Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and make it once. Assuming that the right decision is the same one no matter where you are looking from. Not really a very sensible assumption. The right decision might be "X in Scotland, Y in England and Wales, and Q in Berwick". That decision could be made nationally; you don't need devolution to do that. Or do you mean that in England, they might think "X all over the UK" was best, and in Scotland, "Y all over the UK" was best? I'm not impressed by that case - it doesn't matter what people think, it matters what's best, so let's just do that. "best"? How's that defined, and how do you know the definer was correct? Quite simply, you _don't_ know. Eric |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... On Mar 31, 6:49 pm, Neil Williams wrote: On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: I don't see why it somehow inherently makes sense for it to be a UK- wide scheme, as you seem to suggest. I think it makes more sense than it being by somewhat arbitrarily-delimited[1] countries, especially in the case of Wales (given the the Borders region between England and Scotland doesn't contain fairly large conurbations in the way that it does with Wales). [1] In real terms. Many people live in north Wales but carry on business in Chester, say. They might want to use their free travel there. You can say the UK's internal borders are arbitrarily-delimited if you wish, but there's a whole lot of history to it all. And if there are lines then they have to get drawn somewhere. Anyway, the nature of devolution means that there won't be a UK-wide scheme - Parliament only deals with such matters the territory of England. (Again, feel free to pontificate about a UK Parliament that only has powers w.r.t. some fields in England only, in others in England & Wales, in others NI as well, and in others across the whole of the UK - that's the current constitutional settlement we have. I don't call it pontification, I call it political debate. Same thing. Having a single tier of local government was *exactly* what was proposed for the North East. Also, the whole beauty of it would be wresting various powers away from distant Westminster and Whitehall to somewhere closer to home. It'd be a far better way of doing things than an English Parliament, IMHO (which is how some would 'solve' the 'problem' of lopsided devolution in the UK). Though we should be careful not to devolve things like providing local public transport services to such bodies. We'd end up with the silly situations that exist in, say, Germany, France and Switzerland, where local services stop at the border even where this makes no sense whatsoever. We're better, IMO, with our quasi-national system whereby local authorities can add funding but don't control the entire service. Wow - you're proposing that *local* transport issues should not be devolved to *regional* bodies? Sorry, but I just can't get down with that at all whatsoever! Devolution is all about getting those powers closer to the people - the further away many of these powers and decisions are from Westminster and Whitehall and the centre, and the closer they are to the people and places they apply to, the better in my reckoning. In my 'fantasy constitution' (don't worry, it's not like a whole other mythical type world!) I'd have regional assemblies across England - and I suppose they'd be the ones with responsibility for local transport (along with some arrangement with the local authorities I guess). There could be certain incentives built in (by UK Parliament/ government) for co-operation on cross-regional services. And the regions could offer free bus travel to senior citizens if they wanted to - whether that would extend beyond their region would be up to them to decide and work out. ....and Dragons sorry Mizter T couldn't resist! -- Cheers, Steve. Change jealous to sad to reply. |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On 01/04/2010 16:33, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Eric wrote: Tom Anderson wr Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and make it once. Assuming that the right decision is the same one no matter where you are looking from. Not really a very sensible assumption. The right decision might be "X in Scotland, Y in England and Wales, and Q in Berwick". That decision could be made nationally; you don't need devolution to do that. No. These are different counties, with differing demographics, legal systems, education systems, religions and so on. Before devolution this meant that there was no such thing as a genuinely UK decision anyway and the Scottish dimension had to be considered. The difference in devolution isn't that there are now seperate decisions in Scotland, on most matters there always were even if they were just in the hands of a civil servant in (New) St Andrew's House juggling the Scottish health budget for example. The difference is that these seperate decisions are now made within a democratic infrastructure closer to and accountable to those in Scotland. Or do you mean that in England, they might think "X all over the UK" was best, and in Scotland, "Y all over the UK" was best? I'm not impressed by that case - it doesn't matter what people think, it matters what's best, so let's just do that. Evidence based policy is a good idea, and is more likely in a devolved setup where PR is mysteriously tolerated by the ruling minorities who control Westminster. Hmm, remind me to debate this with you over a beer. Alex. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
National Rail-railcard discounted paper travelcards
On 01/04/2010 08:29, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 00:06:25 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: I cannot imagine how healthcare would be easily devolved. Isn't NHS Scotland a separate organisation to NHS England? Indeed it is and always has been. Created in a seperate act of parliament as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...land)_Act_1947 "Though the title 'National Health Service' implies one health service for the United Kingdom, in reality one NHS was created for England and Wales, accountable to the Secretary of State for Health and a separate NHS was created for Scotland, accountable to the Secretary of State for Scotland." --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk