|
London Overground in chaos
On May 27, 4:49*pm, allantracy wrote:
Given the expenditure of well over £1.5bn on the Overground network nothing should be breaking down or requiring extensive replacement on those sections where the work has been done. Quite what is wrong with the signalling on the DC lines I don't know. *Failure after failure and with ridiculously long repair times. Yeah well London Overground always was just a crap and confusing image makeover. Stuck being nether one thing (new underground line) or the other (main line). Your remarks surprise me. While the shambles reported here is nothing of which TfL should be proud. And, the western side of the Overground need further upgrading (The speed on the Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction stretch is too low). Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. It makes journeys possible that previously required slow bus trips and changes. It makes journeys between the outlying boroughs doable and enjoyable. The Eastern side is especially pleasant. One can nitpick about details. But, overall I am not sure what there is to dislike about the Overground. |
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 2, 12:14*pm, e27002 wrote:
On May 27, 4:49*pm, allantracy wrote: Given the expenditure of well over £1.5bn on the Overground network nothing should be breaking down or requiring extensive replacement on those sections where the work has been done. Quite what is wrong with the signalling on the DC lines I don't know. *Failure after failure and with ridiculously long repair times. Yeah well London Overground always was just a crap and confusing image makeover. Stuck being nether one thing (new underground line) or the other (main line). Your remarks surprise me. *While the shambles reported here is nothing of which TfL should be proud. *And, the western side of the Overground need further upgrading (The speed on the Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction stretch is too low). *Overall the Overground is a great network. *It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. *It makes journeys possible that previously required slow bus trips and changes. *It makes journeys between the outlying boroughs doable and enjoyable. *The Eastern side is especially pleasant. One can nitpick about details. *But, overall I am not sure what there is to dislike about the Overground. The overcrowding is probably the worst thing; it's actually been too successful. |
London Overground in chaos
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:44:31 -0700 (PDT), Stephen Furley
wrote: On Jun 2, 12:14*pm, e27002 wrote: On May 27, 4:49*pm, allantracy wrote: Given the expenditure of well over £1.5bn on the Overground network nothing should be breaking down or requiring extensive replacement on those sections where the work has been done. Quite what is wrong with the signalling on the DC lines I don't know. *Failure after failure and with ridiculously long repair times. Yeah well London Overground always was just a crap and confusing image makeover. Stuck being nether one thing (new underground line) or the other (main line). Your remarks surprise me. *While the shambles reported here is nothing of which TfL should be proud. *And, the western side of the Overground need further upgrading (The speed on the Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction stretch is too low). *Overall the Overground is a great network. *It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. *It makes journeys possible that previously required slow bus trips and changes. *It makes journeys between the outlying boroughs doable and enjoyable. *The Eastern side is especially pleasant. One can nitpick about details. *But, overall I am not sure what there is to dislike about the Overground. The overcrowding is probably the worst thing; it's actually been too successful. Yes, the trains urgently need those fifth cars. It's amazing that three-car 313s were regarded as adequate not so long ago. |
London Overground in chaos
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:35:24 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote: On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:14:09 +0100, Recliner wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:44:31 -0700 (PDT), Stephen Furley wrote: [overground] The overcrowding is probably the worst thing; it's actually been too successful. Yes, the trains urgently need those fifth cars. It's amazing that three-car 313s were regarded as adequate not so long ago. Adequate? http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicohogg/433771507/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicohogg/117224917/ I take the point about the current services being very busy but they aren't yet quite at the crazy levels in these photos. Ouch, yes I'd forgotten how crowded the 313s had become towards the end, probably because I avoided the line. |
London Overground in chaos
"e27002" wrote:
Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. What's this London proper as opposed to "annexed Surrey and Kent"? And what about "annexed Essex", "annexed Hertfordshire" and "still Hertfordshire"?! |
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 2, 2:37*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote: "e27002" wrote: Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. What's this London proper as opposed to "annexed Surrey and Kent"? And what about "annexed Essex", "annexed Hertfordshire" and "still Hertfordshire"?! Middlesex was never South of the Thames. The creation of the LCC saw large chunks of Surrey and Kent Annexed to London. The creation of the GLC saw more land grabs. Last I knew the postal address Chessington, Surrey is/was actually in London. Essex and Herts? I agree, they have lost a chunk of their tax base. |
London Overground in chaos
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 06:45:53 -0700 (PDT), e27002
wrote: On Jun 2, 2:37*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll- wrote: "e27002" wrote: Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. What's this London proper as opposed to "annexed Surrey and Kent"? And what about "annexed Essex", "annexed Hertfordshire" and "still Hertfordshire"?! Middlesex was never South of the Thames. The creation of the LCC saw large chunks of Surrey and Kent Annexed to London. The creation of the GLC saw more land grabs. Last I knew the postal address Chessington, Surrey is/was actually in London. Essex and Herts? I agree, they have lost a chunk of their tax base. It's getting on for 50 years since the "annexations" happened -- how many more decades will it be before you accept them as fact? |
London Overground in chaos
So, what else is new?
|
London Overground in chaos
On 02/06/2012 13:14, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:44:31 -0700 (PDT), Stephen Furley wrote: On Jun 2, 12:14 pm, wrote: On May 27, 4:49 pm, wrote: Given the expenditure of well over £1.5bn on the Overground network nothing should be breaking down or requiring extensive replacement on those sections where the work has been done. Quite what is wrong with the signalling on the DC lines I don't know. Failure after failure and with ridiculously long repair times. Yeah well London Overground always was just a crap and confusing image makeover. Stuck being nether one thing (new underground line) or the other (main line). Your remarks surprise me. While the shambles reported here is nothing of which TfL should be proud. And, the western side of the Overground need further upgrading (The speed on the Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction stretch is too low). Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. It makes journeys possible that previously required slow bus trips and changes. It makes journeys between the outlying boroughs doable and enjoyable. The Eastern side is especially pleasant. One can nitpick about details. But, overall I am not sure what there is to dislike about the Overground. The overcrowding is probably the worst thing; it's actually been too successful. Yes, the trains urgently need those fifth cars. It's amazing that three-car 313s were regarded as adequate not so long ago. When are those fifth cars due to come into service? |
London Overground in chaos
On 02/06/2012 14:04, Recliner wrote:
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:35:24 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:14:09 +0100, Recliner wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:44:31 -0700 (PDT), Stephen Furley wrote: [overground] The overcrowding is probably the worst thing; it's actually been too successful. Yes, the trains urgently need those fifth cars. It's amazing that three-car 313s were regarded as adequate not so long ago. Adequate? http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicohogg/433771507/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicohogg/117224917/ I take the point about the current services being very busy but they aren't yet quite at the crazy levels in these photos. Ouch, yes I'd forgotten how crowded the 313s had become towards the end, probably because I avoided the line. I remember that they used to call NLL various names, such as "The Silver Bullet" and "The Free Line." |
London Overground in chaos
From nationalrail.co.uk:
Incident created 02/06/2012 19:59 Last updated20:34 - 02/06/2012 Route affected Stratford, Dalston Kingsland, Camden Road, Gospel Oak, West Hampstead, Kensal Rise, Willesden Junction, Shepherds Bush, Kensington Olympia, West Brompton, Imperial Wharf & Clapham Junction / Acton Central, South Acton, Gunnersbury, Kew Gardens & Richmond Train operator affected London Overground Description Overhead wire problems are causing disruption near Willesden Junction. Because of this, the following changes will apply until further notice: There are currently no trains between Willesden Junction and Clapham Junction There are currently no trains between Stratford and Richmond Journeys may be delayed by up to 60 minutes Passengers may use London Underground services on all reasonable routes. -- gordon |
London Overground in chaos
On 02/06/2012 20:09, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 18:38:43 +0100, " wrote: On 02/06/2012 13:14, Recliner wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:44:31 -0700 (PDT), Stephen Furley wrote: On Jun 2, 12:14 pm, wrote: On May 27, 4:49 pm, wrote: Given the expenditure of well over £1.5bn on the Overground network nothing should be breaking down or requiring extensive replacement on those sections where the work has been done. Quite what is wrong with the signalling on the DC lines I don't know. Failure after failure and with ridiculously long repair times. Yeah well London Overground always was just a crap and confusing image makeover. Stuck being nether one thing (new underground line) or the other (main line). Your remarks surprise me. While the shambles reported here is nothing of which TfL should be proud. And, the western side of the Overground need further upgrading (The speed on the Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction stretch is too low). Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. It makes journeys possible that previously required slow bus trips and changes. It makes journeys between the outlying boroughs doable and enjoyable. The Eastern side is especially pleasant. One can nitpick about details. But, overall I am not sure what there is to dislike about the Overground. The overcrowding is probably the worst thing; it's actually been too successful. Yes, the trains urgently need those fifth cars. It's amazing that three-car 313s were regarded as adequate not so long ago. When are those fifth cars due to come into service? There is no firm, funded plan for 5 cars on parts of the Overground. TfL have submitted the proposal as part of their overall submission for works during Control Period 5 which starts in 2014. The Government will announce what works it will progress and fund for CP5 in July 2012. My view is that Boris will be "rewarded" for his Mayoral election victory by government agreeing to either fund Overground improvements or devolve some franchises to TfL control or possibly both. I think there is some heavyweight lobbying going on at the moment. Which franchises, for example, Northern City Line? |
London Overground in chaos
|
London Overground in chaos
e27002 wrote:
Last I knew the postal address Chessington, Surrey is/was actually in London. You can put "Chessington", "Chessington, Surrey", "Chessington, London", "Chessington, Greater London", "Chessington, Occupied Surrey", "Chessington, Neverneverland" or "Chessington, [Whatever]" on a postal address. Royal Mail no longer require counties to be included - they gave up in 1996 around the time of technological advancements and yet another round of local government reorganisation changing county boundaries. -- My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c |
London Overground in chaos
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 15:00:07 +0100, Recliner
wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 06:45:53 -0700 (PDT), e27002 wrote: On Jun 2, 2:37*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll- wrote: "e27002" wrote: Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. What's this London proper as opposed to "annexed Surrey and Kent"? And what about "annexed Essex", "annexed Hertfordshire" and "still Hertfordshire"?! Middlesex was never South of the Thames. The creation of the LCC saw large chunks of Surrey and Kent Annexed to London. The creation of the GLC saw more land grabs. Last I knew the postal address Chessington, Surrey is/was actually in London. Essex and Herts? I agree, they have lost a chunk of their tax base. It's getting on for 50 years since the "annexations" happened -- how many more decades will it be before you accept them as fact? For as long as people keep accusing non-Londoners of being Londoners ? |
London Overground in chaos
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 12:45:20 -0700 (PDT), gordonT
wrote: From nationalrail.co.uk: Incident created 02/06/2012 19:59 Last updated20:34 - 02/06/2012 Route affected Stratford, Dalston Kingsland, Camden Road, Gospel Oak, West Hampstead, Kensal Rise, Willesden Junction, Shepherds Bush, Kensington Olympia, West Brompton, Imperial Wharf & Clapham Junction / Acton Central, South Acton, Gunnersbury, Kew Gardens & Richmond Train operator affected London Overground Description Overhead wire problems are causing disruption near Willesden Junction. Because of this, the following changes will apply until further notice: There are currently no trains between Willesden Junction and Clapham Junction There are currently no trains between Stratford and Richmond Journeys may be delayed by up to 60 minutes Passengers may use London Underground services on all reasonable routes. Why exactly is it that _any_ railway problems in London are "chaos"? -- Frank Erskine |
London Overground in chaos
In message , at 00:35:09 on
Sun, 3 Jun 2012, Frank Erskine remarked: Why exactly is it that _any_ railway problems in London are "chaos"? Because with the number of passengers (and tph) disruption does often cause chaos. -- Roland Perry |
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 2, 10:39*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote: e27002 wrote: Last I knew the postal address Chessington, Surrey is/was actually in London. You can put "Chessington", "Chessington, Surrey", "Chessington, London", "Chessington, Greater London", "Chessington, Occupied Surrey", "Chessington, Neverneverland" or "Chessington, [Whatever]" on a postal address. Royal Mail no longer require counties to be included - they gave up in 1996 around the time of technological advancements and yet another round of local government reorganisation changing county boundaries. Understood. And it was a good thing. AFIK, the UK was the only entity still utilizing counties in mailing addresses. However, until 1996 the mailing address was CHESSINGTON, Surrey. And, many residents think of themselves as part of Surrey. None-the-less, they pay Council Tax to the GLA. This would be well and good if they had voted to become Londoners. They never did. In 1974 they simply woke up within the GLC. Southwark, Putney, Wimbledon, et al, suffered the same fate in 1889. No liberals screaming for democracy on this one! |
London Overground in chaos
On 02/06/2012 14:45, e27002 wrote:
On Jun 2, 2:37 pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering"T.C.Roll- wrote: wrote: Overall the Overground is a great network. It joins together the networks in London proper, and the parts in annexed Surrey and Kent. What's this London proper as opposed to "annexed Surrey and Kent"? And what about "annexed Essex", "annexed Hertfordshire" and "still Hertfordshire"?! Middlesex was never South of the Thames. The creation of the LCC saw large chunks of Surrey and Kent Annexed to London. The creation of the GLC saw more land grabs. Last I knew the postal address Chessington, Surrey is/was actually in London. Essex and Herts? I agree, they have lost a chunk of their tax base. County Hall for Surrey, is in Kingston Upon Thames, which is now London (with a Surrey address) |
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 3, 9:09*am, e27002 wrote:
On Jun 2, 10:39*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: e27002 wrote: *However, until 1996 the mailing address was CHESSINGTON, Surrey. *And, many residents think of themselves as part of Surrey. *None-the-less, they pay Council Tax to the GLA. This would be well and good if they had voted to become Londoners. They never did. *In 1974 they simply woke up within the GLC. Actually it was 1965. And I'm not sure it was that much of a surprise. Further east, Caterham and Warlingham UDC succesfully campaigned to be left out of Greater London, only to be swallowed up into the ridiculously named Tandridge District in 1974. Pity really as I would be entitled to a Freedom Pass by now and our roads would be maintained to a higher standard than the pathetic Surrey County Council manage. Peter |
London Overground in chaos
Paul Corfield wrote on 03 June 2012 09:25:47 ...
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 12:45:20 -0700 (PDT), wrote: From nationalrail.co.uk: Incident created 02/06/2012 19:59 Last updated20:34 - 02/06/2012 Route affected Stratford, Dalston Kingsland, Camden Road, Gospel Oak, West Hampstead, Kensal Rise, Willesden Junction, Shepherds Bush, Kensington Olympia, West Brompton, Imperial Wharf& Clapham Junction / Acton Central, South Acton, Gunnersbury, Kew Gardens& Richmond Train operator affected London Overground Description Overhead wire problems are causing disruption near Willesden Junction. Because of this, the following changes will apply until further notice: There are currently no trains between Willesden Junction and Clapham Junction There are currently no trains between Stratford and Richmond Journeys may be delayed by up to 60 minutes Passengers may use London Underground services on all reasonable routes. And it is still ongoing with trains seemingly now running via Primrose Road between Camden Rd and Willesden Junction. Trains aren't serving trains west of Kentish Town West. Whatever brought the wires down at Willesden did a good job if it can't be fixed overnight. National Rail were saying last night that they hoped to have it fixed by this morning. It sounds as if they re-opened the line but a train brought the wires down again. Latest tweet says "Repairs to overhead line will start after 9am - once we've moved the trapped train." It's even affecting GOBLIN (which was partly suspended anyway for engineering work today), presumably because they can't get the DMUs to Gospel Oak. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Quote:
|
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 3, 11:00*am, Peter Heather wrote:
On Jun 3, 9:09*am, e27002 wrote: On Jun 2, 10:39*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: e27002 wrote: **However, until 1996 the mailing address was CHESSINGTON, Surrey. *And, many residents think of themselves as part of Surrey. *None-the-less, they pay Council Tax to the GLA. This would be well and good if they had voted to become Londoners. They never did. *In 1974 they simply woke up within the GLC. Actually it was 1965. And I'm not sure it was that much of a surprise. Further east, Caterham and Warlingham UDC succesfully campaigned to be left out of Greater London, only to be swallowed up into the ridiculously named Tandridge District in 1974. Pity really as I would be entitled to a Freedom Pass by now and our roads would be maintained to a higher standard than the pathetic Surrey County Council manage. Not part of the 1975 Local Government re-organizations then? The new mega boroughs and districts are awful. Bognor Regis is now run from Littlehampton. Like Littlehampton gives a damn. We lost the borough of Paddington (to the City of Westminster). Nonsense, all of it. |
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 3, 11:00*am, Peter Heather wrote:
On Jun 3, 9:09*am, e27002 wrote: On Jun 2, 10:39*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: e27002 wrote: **However, until 1996 the mailing address was CHESSINGTON, Surrey. *And, many residents think of themselves as part of Surrey. *None-the-less, they pay Council Tax to the GLA. This would be well and good if they had voted to become Londoners. They never did. *In 1974 they simply woke up within the GLC. Actually it was 1965. And I'm not sure it was that much of a surprise. Further east, Caterham and Warlingham UDC succesfully campaigned to be left out of Greater London, only to be swallowed up into the ridiculously named Tandridge District in 1974. Pity really as I would be entitled to a Freedom Pass by now and our roads would be maintained to a higher standard than the pathetic Surrey County Council manage. But, you would be paying council tax at Surrey rates instead of GLA rates. |
London Overground in chaos
On 02/06/2012 22:15, Jarle H Knudsen wrote:
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 20:59:38 +0100, wrote: On 02/06/2012 20:09, Paul Corfield wrote: My view is that Boris will be "rewarded" for his Mayoral election victory by government agreeing to either fund Overground improvements or devolve some franchises to TfL control or possibly both. I think there is some heavyweight lobbying going on at the moment. Which franchises, for example, Northern City Line? Doesn't the services that run on that line terminate well outside London? Welwyn Garden City is 20 miles out of Kings Cross station, whereas Amersham is 23.7 miles from Charing Cross TfL also ran services out to Aylesbury, which is almost 38 miles from Marlylebone, until 1961. Upminster is 16 miles out from Charing Cross, though I don't know how far out Watford Junction is from Euston. Don't forget that services once ran as far out as Ongar. Paris' RATP operates lines RER Lines A and B, though I don't know how far out they go from the centre of town or their respective Zero Miles. |
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 3, 11:36*am, "
wrote: On 02/06/2012 22:15, Jarle H Knudsen wrote: On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 20:59:38 +0100, wrote: On 02/06/2012 20:09, Paul Corfield wrote: * *My view is that Boris will be "rewarded" for his Mayoral election victory by government agreeing to either fund Overground improvements or devolve some franchises to TfL control or possibly both. I think there is some heavyweight lobbying going on at the moment. Which franchises, for example, Northern City Line? Doesn't the services that run on that line terminate well outside London? Welwyn Garden City is 20 miles out of Kings Cross station, whereas Amersham is 23.7 miles from Charing Cross TfL also ran services out to Aylesbury, which is almost 38 miles from Marlylebone, until 1961. The Metropolitan Ralway ran to Verney Junction where one could change for Bletchley and Banbury. So much for progress. Upminster is 16 miles out from Charing Cross, though I don't know how far out Watford Junction is from Euston. Don't forget that services once ran as far out as Ongar. Paris' RATP operates lines RER Lines A and B, though I don't know how far out they go from the centre of town or their respective Zero Miles. |
London Overground in chaos
On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 03:34:41 -0700 (PDT), e27002
wrote: On Jun 3, 11:00*am, Peter Heather wrote: On Jun 3, 9:09*am, e27002 wrote: On Jun 2, 10:39*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: e27002 wrote: **However, until 1996 the mailing address was CHESSINGTON, Surrey. *And, many residents think of themselves as part of Surrey. *None-the-less, they pay Council Tax to the GLA. This would be well and good if they had voted to become Londoners. They never did. *In 1974 they simply woke up within the GLC. Actually it was 1965. And I'm not sure it was that much of a surprise. Further east, Caterham and Warlingham UDC succesfully campaigned to be left out of Greater London, only to be swallowed up into the ridiculously named Tandridge District in 1974. Pity really as I would be entitled to a Freedom Pass by now and our roads would be maintained to a higher standard than the pathetic Surrey County Council manage. But, you would be paying council tax at Surrey rates instead of GLA rates. Surrey council tax rates are slightly higher than Sutton: Surrey: http://www.surreyheath.gov.uk/ctbene...ciltax1213.htm Sutton: http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=9145 |
London Overground in chaos
On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 03:39:04 -0700 (PDT), e27002
wrote: On Jun 3, 11:36*am, " wrote: On 02/06/2012 22:15, Jarle H Knudsen wrote: On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 20:59:38 +0100, wrote: On 02/06/2012 20:09, Paul Corfield wrote: * *My view is that Boris will be "rewarded" for his Mayoral election victory by government agreeing to either fund Overground improvements or devolve some franchises to TfL control or possibly both. I think there is some heavyweight lobbying going on at the moment. Which franchises, for example, Northern City Line? Doesn't the services that run on that line terminate well outside London? Welwyn Garden City is 20 miles out of Kings Cross station, whereas Amersham is 23.7 miles from Charing Cross TfL also ran services out to Aylesbury, which is almost 38 miles from Marlylebone, until 1961. The Metropolitan Ralway ran to Verney Junction where one could change for Bletchley and Banbury. So much for progress. Of course this was when the Met was a private company with mainline ambitions, not part of the LPTB; after it became part of the LPTB, the Brill and Verney Junction lines were closed in quick succession. But it's interesting that the former LPTB did cover an area with a radius of ~30 miles from Charing Cross, so there is a precedent for train and bus services outside the GLC area being run by TfL's predecessor body. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...Transport_Area |
London Overground in chaos
e27002 wrote:
You can put "Chessington", "Chessington, Surrey", "Chessington, London", "Chessington, Greater London", "Chessington, Occupied Surrey", "Chessington, Neverneverland" or "Chessington, [Whatever]" on a postal address. Royal no longer require counties to be included - they gave up in 1996 around the time of technological advancements and yet another round of local government reorganisation changing county boundaries. Understood. And it was a good thing. AFIK, the UK was the only entity still utilizing counties in mailing addresses. However, until 1996 the mailing address was CHESSINGTON, Surrey. And, many residents think of themselves as part of Surrey. None-the-less, they pay Council Tax to the GLA. This would be well and good if they had voted to become Londoners. They never did. In 1974 they simply woke up within the GLC. 1965 actually. Southwark, Putney, Wimbledon, et al, suffered the same fate in 1889. The London County Council broadly followed the Metropolitan Board of Works boundary. The metropolis had already reached that far. No liberals screaming for democracy on this one! Too late I'm afraid. There wasn't a tradition of local referendums on these things back then (or even now) but their neighbours in Epsom & Ewell kickd up enough fuss about the initial proposed boundary to get it revised for their exclusion (hence on the map Chessington looks like a penis). During the last GLA count we had hilarity when one ballot came up with a written message saying it was a disgrace the election was happening because Chislehurst voted by 95% against the Mayor & Assembly. The world does not revolve around Chislehurst. -- My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c |
London Overground in chaos
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 11:39:34 +0100, Recliner
wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 03:34:41 -0700 (PDT), e27002 wrote: On Jun 3, 11:00*am, Peter Heather wrote: On Jun 3, 9:09*am, e27002 wrote: On Jun 2, 10:39*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: e27002 wrote: **However, until 1996 the mailing address was CHESSINGTON, Surrey. *And, many residents think of themselves as part of Surrey. *None-the-less, they pay Council Tax to the GLA. Nobody pays council tax to the GLA, it is paid to the local burgh with the GLA and Met Police taking their cut. This would be well and good if they had voted to become Londoners. They never did. *In 1974 they simply woke up within the GLC. Actually it was 1965. And I'm not sure it was that much of a surprise. Further east, Caterham and Warlingham UDC succesfully campaigned to be left out of Greater London, only to be swallowed up into the ridiculously named Tandridge District in 1974. Pity really as I would be entitled to a Freedom Pass by now and our roads would be maintained to a higher standard than the pathetic Surrey County Council manage. But, you would be paying council tax at Surrey rates instead of GLA rates. Surrey council tax rates are slightly higher than Sutton: Surrey: http://www.surreyheath.gov.uk/ctbene...ciltax1213.htm Sutton: http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=9145 |
London Overground in chaos
"Peter Heather" wrote Actually it was 1965. And I'm not sure it was that much of a surprise. Further east, Caterham and Warlingham UDC succesfully campaigned to be left out of Greater London, only to be swallowed up into the ridiculously named Tandridge District in 1974. Pity really as I would be entitled to a Freedom Pass by now and our roads would be maintained to a higher standard than the pathetic Surrey County Council manage. Knockholt was put into Greater London in 1965, and managed to get out in 1974. Ob rail - Knockholt station is not in Knockholt, but (just) in Greater London. Peter |
London Overground in chaos
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote:
During the last GLA count we had hilarity when one ballot came up with a written message saying it was a disgrace the election was happening because Chislehurst voted by 95% against the Mayor & Assembly. The world does not revolve around Chislehurst. To some in Chislehurst, it might. |
London Overground in chaos
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
... And it is still ongoing with trains seemingly now running via Primrose Road between Camden Rd and Willesden Junction. Trains aren't serving trains west of Kentish Town West. Whatever brought the wires down at Willesden did a good job if it can't be fixed overnight. I was on the Pathfinder "York Flyer" charter, behind 'Deltic' 55 022 "Royal Scots Grey". We were held at Camden Road for over half an hour from around 19:20, as we were booked via Gospel Oak and Acton Wells Jn. to gain access to the GWML, for set down at Didcot Parkway, Oxford, Banbury, Leamington Spa, Coventry and Birmingham stations. Information passed to me by colleagues 'in the know' was that a class 378 had brought the wires down at the changeover point from a.c. to d.c. traction and that the dewirement had then been run into by a service heading in the opposite direction, causing a minor fire. As a result, neither the booked route to the GWML nor the alternative, running via Primrose Hill and Willesden West London Junction, were available. Consequently, the charter was diverted non-stop down the WCML to Coventry (setting down Cov and Birmingham passengers, for onward travel via service trains), where the 'Deltic' was run round and the train ran in the opposite direction to that booked, setting down at Leamington Spa, Banbury and Oxford before terminating at Didcot Parkway around three hours late at around 23:30. Taxis were provided for those of us off the direct route, who had missed last trains! |
London Overground in chaos
On Jun 3, 11:39*am, Recliner wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 03:34:41 -0700 (PDT), e27002 But, you would be paying council tax at Surrey rates instead of GLA rates. Surrey council tax rates are slightly higher than Sutton: Surrey:http://www.surreyheath.gov.uk/ctbene...iltax1213..htm Sutton:http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=9145- Hide quoted text - And Tandridge's council tax (includes Surrey CC's precept) is also higher, by about 8%, than neighbouring Croydon's. So it seems that those in Greater London, whether they consider themselves Londoners or not, get a better service at less cost to themselves than those of us outside the boundary. Peter |
London Overground in chaos
In message
, at 06:56:04 on Mon, 4 Jun 2012, Peter Heather remarked: But, you would be paying council tax at Surrey rates instead of GLA rates. Surrey council tax rates are slightly higher than Sutton: Surrey:http://www.surreyheath.gov.uk/ctbene...ciltax1213.htm Sutton:http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=9145- Hide quoted text - And Tandridge's council tax (includes Surrey CC's precept) is also higher, by about 8%, than neighbouring Croydon's. So it seems that those in Greater London, whether they consider themselves Londoners or not, get a better service at less cost to themselves than those of us outside the boundary. It's not surprising there are economies of scale in a dense urban area, compared to delivering services over an area with a scattered population. -- Roland Perry |
London Overground in chaos
On 2012\06\04 15:39, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 06:56:04 on Mon, 4 Jun 2012, Peter Heather remarked: But, you would be paying council tax at Surrey rates instead of GLA rates. Surrey council tax rates are slightly higher than Sutton: Surrey:http://www.surreyheath.gov.uk/ctbene...ciltax1213.htm Sutton:http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=9145- Hide quoted text - And Tandridge's council tax (includes Surrey CC's precept) is also higher, by about 8%, than neighbouring Croydon's. So it seems that those in Greater London, whether they consider themselves Londoners or not, get a better service at less cost to themselves than those of us outside the boundary. It's not surprising there are economies of scale in a dense urban area, compared to delivering services over an area with a scattered population. So if the Tories have any sense, they will offer the people of Caterham and Ewell and a few other Tory areas just outside the boundary a referendum to become part of London, to make sure that the London Mayor stays Tory. |
London Overground in chaos
"Basil Jet" wrote So if the Tories have any sense, they will offer the people of Caterham and Ewell and a few other Tory areas just outside the boundary a referendum to become part of London, to make sure that the London Mayor stays Tory. If they had any sense they'd be enthusiastic supporters of Scottish Independence, as they get very few votes there, but would have a permanent majority at Westminster if it weren't for the Scottish members. Peter |
London Overground in chaos
There was a report a week or so ago that TfL are likely to bid for the
East Anglia and South Eastern rail franchises, not just have control of the London bits. http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/tfl-seek...ises/201221325 The report says that "Both franchises will be awarded by the Department for Transport and TfL is hoping to beat commercial train operators in order to bring the London Overground experience to the routes." The thread above doesn't breed confidence... As one of the commenters on the Mayorwatch says, few seats and no bogs London to Norwich doesn't sound fun. |
London Overground in chaos
"Peter Masson" wrote in message
... So if the Tories have any sense, they will offer the people of Caterham and Ewell and a few other Tory areas just outside the boundary a referendum to become part of London, to make sure that the London Mayor stays Tory. If they had any sense they'd be enthusiastic supporters of Scottish Independence, as they get very few votes there, but would have a permanent majority at Westminster if it weren't for the Scottish members. This is actually a myth. There have only been two occasions when Labour's had a UK majority but the Conservatives had an majority of English seats - 1964 & Oct 1974. Much was made of 2005 when the Conservatives getting more votes in England than Labour, but Labour still had many more seats thanks to old boundaries, differential turnout and tactical voting. And Scotland going independent would have ramifications for the UK far beyond the mythical "permanent" numbers in the Westminster Parliament. The Conservatives are a party committed to the UK as a whole and its position in the world. They're not going to start trimming off bits for electoral convenience. -- My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c |
London Overground in chaos
Basil Jet wrote:
So if the Tories have any sense, they will offer the people of Caterham and Ewell and a few other Tory areas just outside the boundary a referendum to become part of London, to make sure that the London Mayor stays Tory. Epsom & Ewell (I can't really imagine them trying to split the borough) is not a guaranteed Conservative banker in local government though. The borough council is run by a Residents' Association since at least the early 1930s and the same group also regularly take nearly all the E&E seats on Surrey County Council, whilst the Conservatives are weak in E&E, despite now putting up a proper slate at local elections. If they decided to contest GLA elections (as their weaker Havering counterparts have) they could add little to the Conservative result. And the figures for successive London Mayoral elections, and more especially London Assembly elections, are such that no one or probably even two or three areas could be added that could guarantee to tip the balance. I can't seriously envisage an addition referendum giving *all* the areas a collective in or out approach - rather each individual area would be voting on the assumption that it could be the only one to be added. Finally whilst a Conservative government in Westminster might call the referendums, the ground campaign would have to be fought by local Conservative parties who would probably not be keen to see their areas added to London, especially a London that could throw up another Zone 1 Livingstone figure. Look at the recent Mayoral referendums in the big cities - again the Conservatives nationally were enthusiastic but the local parties weren't all as keen, perhaps because they have a more realistic idea about how many potential Borises there are in their cities. -- My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk