On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:


-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.


Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.
There are enough issues North of the River to resolve.

e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:


-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.


Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.
There are enough issues North of the River to resolve.

And how would that help anyone?

"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:


-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.


Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.

Hows that going to make fares cheaper for kids?

tim

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 15:22:52 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:


-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.


Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.

Hows that going to make fares cheaper for kids?

Something on which the respective counties would make a determination.
I believe most counties provide a child subsidy for buses.

"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 15:22:52 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:


-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.


Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.

Hows that going to make fares cheaper for kids?

Something on which the respective counties would make a determination.
I believe most counties provide a child subsidy for buses.

round 'ere (Kent) they are stopping paying for bus passes to school

the idea that they might have any money to subsidise leisure fares is pure
fantasy

tim

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 16:19:04 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 15:22:52 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:


-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.


Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.

Hows that going to make fares cheaper for kids?

Something on which the respective counties would make a determination.
I believe most counties provide a child subsidy for buses.

round 'ere (Kent) they are stopping paying for bus passes to school

the idea that they might have any money to subsidise leisure fares is pure
fantasy

So gaining the tax base of erstwhile metropolitan (Northeast) Kent
would be distinctly advantageous. By sensible investment and suitable
carrots they might event tempt some businesses to cross the Thames.

e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 16:19:04 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 15:22:52 +0100, "tim....."
wrote:


"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:


-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.


Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.

Hows that going to make fares cheaper for kids?

Something on which the respective counties would make a determination.
I believe most counties provide a child subsidy for buses.

round 'ere (Kent) they are stopping paying for bus passes to school

the idea that they might have any money to subsidise leisure fares is pure
fantasy

So gaining the tax base of erstwhile metropolitan (Northeast) Kent
would be distinctly advantageous. By sensible investment and suitable
carrots they might event tempt some businesses to cross the Thames.

Perhaps it's time that you recognised that London is rather more than just
the City?

In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:

-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.

Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.
There are enough issues North of the River to resolve.

Oi! Watch it you! I was born and brought up in that part of LONDON. It's
been part of the capital since at least 1854.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote:
In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:

-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.

Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.
There are enough issues North of the River to resolve.

Oi! Watch it you! I was born and brought up in that part of LONDON. It's
been part of the capital since at least 1854.

Adrian is apparently obsessed with returning to some arbitrary previous
version of the English county map. He refuses to accept any changes since
then.

In article

rg, (Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 08:02:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), tolly57
wrote:

-- No not the country, London fares for children. Article on BBC
London news 6.30 p/m yesterday highlighted the cost of fares for
children across the capital. Because TFL run more services north
of the river children up to age 11 can travel free whereas in the
south, national rail charge over fives. About time the mayor got
control of services within the M25.

Or, have HMG return "London South of the Thames" to Kent and Surrey.
There are enough issues North of the River to resolve.

Oi! Watch it you! I was born and brought up in that part of LONDON.
It's been part of the capital since at least 1854.

Adrian is apparently obsessed with returning to some arbitrary previous
version of the English county map. He refuses to accept any changes since
then.

The South Bank of the Thames has been in London far too long even for him.

--
Colin Rosenstiel