[x-posted to utl, original thread on uk.r]

On 21/03/2012 09:07, Neil Williams wrote:

On Mar 20, 9:09 pm, Mizter wrote:

(FWIW in London it took a long time until there was a Peak Day
Travelcard, now called the Anytime Day Travelcard - whilst LT was
interested in such a product, the 'big railway' wasn't, so LT launched
their "LT Card", a one-day card valid during the morning peak but only
good for travel on LT services - the Peak/Anytime Day Travelcard
superseded this.)

One thing I never "got" about London is why it didn't have PTE-like
powers over local rail (i.e. ticket validity plus control of services
within the boundary). But I think that's what Boris and Ken are
campaigning for, no?

Yes. It was on the agenda some years ago under Ken's mayoralty, but I
think baby steps prevailed - TfL did get control of Silverlink Metro,
now London Overground, and that's been a great success. TfL also had a
lot of input into the new (i.e. current) Southern franchise in terms of
improved service specifications for the Metro services, which has been
welcome. And TfL has funded or part-funded a variety of improvements to
suburban rail stations in London (though I'm not sure if that's really
happening much now with money being so tight). And yes, Boris has made
similar proposals of late, having had TfL commission a new study on the
matter.

There's a whole long history as to why the arrangements in London turned
out as it have - it's a legacy of many things. What I'm less clear on is
how much of a debate there was, if any, about a comprehensive 'London
PTE' that would include rail back in the late 60's when the PTA/PTE
concept was devised and the empowering legislation, the 1968 Transport
Act, was formulated.

(Sorry for hijacking the thread with talk of the Great Wen - subject
changed accordingly.)

In article , (Mizter T) wrote:

There's a whole long history as to why the arrangements in London
turned out as it have - it's a legacy of many things. What I'm less
clear on is how much of a debate there was, if any, about a
comprehensive 'London PTE' that would include rail back in the late
60's when the PTA/PTE concept was devised and the empowering
legislation, the 1968 Transport Act, was formulated.

At the time of the 1968 Transport Act which first created PTAs/PTEs London
Transport was still Government-owned but had been separated from British
Rail when the London Transport Board was created and the BTC abolished in
1963 or thereabouts. In 1970 municipal control of public transport was
returned for the first time since 1933 but only of parts of the LTB. Country
buses were hived off, initially to the National Bus Company and privatised
after 1985.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 21/03/2012 14:02, wrote:

(Mizter T) wrote:

There's a whole long history as to why the arrangements in London
turned out as it have - it's a legacy of many things. What I'm less
clear on is how much of a debate there was, if any, about a
comprehensive 'London PTE' that would include rail back in the late
60's when the PTA/PTE concept was devised and the empowering
legislation, the 1968 Transport Act, was formulated.

At the time of the 1968 Transport Act which first created PTAs/PTEs London
Transport was still Government-owned but had been separated from British
Rail when the London Transport Board was created and the BTC abolished in
1963 or thereabouts. In 1970 municipal control of public transport was
returned for the first time since 1933 but only of parts of the LTB. Country
buses were hived off, initially to the National Bus Company and privatised
after 1985.


That's a fair enough interpretation - i.e. in London, the embodiment of
the late 60's PTE-style reforms that were happening elsewhere was the
passing of responsibility for London Transport - or at least the bulk of
LT that sat within Greater London - from central government, in the form
of the London Transport Board, over to the new London Transport
Executive, under the control of the GLC.

The question really is was anything more radical considered or discussed
at the time, in terms of the new (post-1970) LTE having some powers or
influence over heavy rail within Greater London? (i.e. in the way that
PTEs had rail powers & responsibilities elsewhere in the UK.) It must at
least have been mooted.

In article , (Mizter T) wrote:

On 21/03/2012 14:02, wrote:

(Mizter T) wrote:

There's a whole long history as to why the arrangements in London
turned out as it have - it's a legacy of many things. What I'm less
clear on is how much of a debate there was, if any, about a
comprehensive 'London PTE' that would include rail back in the late
60's when the PTA/PTE concept was devised and the empowering
legislation, the 1968 Transport Act, was formulated.

At the time of the 1968 Transport Act which first created PTAs/PTEs
London Transport was still Government-owned but had been separated from
British Rail when the London Transport Board was created and the BTC
abolished in 1963 or thereabouts. In 1970 municipal control of public
transport was returned for the first time since 1933 but only of parts
of the LTB. Country buses were hived off, initially to the National Bus
Company and privatised after 1985.

That's a fair enough interpretation - i.e. in London, the embodiment
of the late 60's PTE-style reforms that were happening elsewhere was
the passing of responsibility for London Transport - or at least the
bulk of LT that sat within Greater London - from central government,
in the form of the London Transport Board, over to the new London
Transport Executive, under the control of the GLC.

The question really is was anything more radical considered or
discussed at the time, in terms of the new (post-1970) LTE having
some powers or influence over heavy rail within Greater London? (i.e.
in the way that PTEs had rail powers & responsibilities elsewhere in
the UK.) It must at least have been mooted.

Apparently not as the idea of any local government influence over British
Rail services was very much at an early stage in 1968. So they decided to
try it out in the PTEs first. The extent was limited at first and only
expanded later, IIRC.

--
Colin Rosenstiel