Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
A think tank comments:
http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355 Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's about time this notion that London should somehow be artificially divorced from its south east context is challenged, and this helps do just that. IMO, in terms of transport and many other matters, the London area should be managed as an integral part of the south east of England, not separated out into an artificial region, with the surrounding area divided between two further administrative regions - east and south east. Rich |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , Rich Mallard
writes http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355 Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's about time this notion that London should somehow be artificially divorced from its south east context is challenged, and this helps do just that. Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast ![]() -- Paul Terry |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 13:19:44 +0000 someone who may be Paul Terry
wrote this:- Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast ![]() That was my initial thought too. It remains my thought, along with the thought that I should really not condemn "influential" "think" tanks on the basis of them finally coming up with what "bad old" BR came up with decades ago. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rich Mallard wrote:
A think tank comments: http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355 Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's about time this notion that London should somehow be artificially divorced from its south east context is challenged, and this helps do just that. IMO, in terms of transport and many other matters, the London area should be managed as an integral part of the south east of England, not separated out into an artificial region, with the surrounding area divided between two further administrative regions - east and south east. Rich Er... aren't TfL suggesting the opposite though? ie they want control of the main line railways that are in the TfL area. It's going to an interesting few months as they start their various power plays on the TOC's to get them to share their revenue etc etc. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In uk.railway Paul Terry wrote:
Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast ![]() Damn, I was just about to post that ![]() pete -- "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Pete Fenelon" wrote in message
... In uk.railway Paul Terry wrote: Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast ![]() Damn, I was just about to post that ![]() Damn, I was just about to post *that*. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"Rich Mallard" wrote: A think tank comments: http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355 Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's about time this notion that London should somehow be artificially divorced from its south east context is challenged, and this helps do just that. It's gone down like a lead balloon with the councils in north-west Kent, south-east Essex, south Hertfordshire, etc. -- http://www.election.demon.co.uk "The guilty party was the Liberal Democrats and they were hardened offenders, and coded racism was again in evidence in leaflets distributed in September 1993." - Nigel Copsey, "Contemporary British Fascism", page 62. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"David Boothroyd" wrote in message
... In article , "Rich Mallard" wrote: A think tank comments: http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355 It's gone down like a lead balloon with the councils in north-west Kent, south-east Essex, south Hertfordshire, etc. Since it would diminish their power, this is unsurprising. But it might not go down like a lead balloon with the voters of those areas, which is what really matters. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "John Rowland" wrote in message ... "David Boothroyd" wrote in message ... In article , "Rich Mallard" wrote: A think tank comments: http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355 It's gone down like a lead balloon with the councils in north-west Kent, south-east Essex, south Hertfordshire, etc. Since it would diminish their power, this is unsurprising. But it might not go down like a lead balloon with the voters of those areas, which is what really matters. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes From the point of view of purely 'running a railway', divorced from the reality of politics, yes the return of NSE may make sense. However, TfL is the PTE for Greater London, subsidised by the residents of Greater London and managed by the elected representatives of the residents of Greater London. TfL as a single body wants to integrate all forms of transport within Greater London. This provides several benefits for the people of Greater London (Ticketing, Accountability, similar standards for all GLA council tax payers whether they are north or south of the river etc.). If we, as GLA Council Tax Payers are prepared to pay for good public transport services, why shouldn't we be able to have some control over stations and services within our area? It would be impossible to exert co-ordinated political control over a Greater South East rail body in the same way as is possible in the GLA. You would have continual political fighting between the labour suburbs and Tory shires. And the Tory Shires wouldn't want their Council Taxes raised to pay a share equal to that paid by GLA residents (when so many people out there are quite happy with their private vehicles). The current level of subsidies show that (for the forseeable future) you cannot run a railway without vast sums of public subsidy. The price to pay for that is 'political control / public accountability'. And if it's a case of the railways or local government changing its structure to fit reality, it's the railways that are going to have to adapt. Colin |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 22:49:12 -0000, "Colin"
wrote: It would be impossible to exert co-ordinated political control over a Greater South East rail body in the same way as is possible in the GLA. You would have continual political fighting between the labour suburbs and Tory shires. And the Tory Shires wouldn't want their Council Taxes raised to pay a share equal to that paid by GLA residents (when so many people out there are quite happy with their private vehicles). It's not so much the "Tory Shires" wanting their cars, rather that the railway in the South East is largely geared up towards getting people to London, and therefore is irrelevant to most other journeys, which will either be by bus or more likely by car. Public transport in Bucks, for example, is appalling outside the towns, and middling to mediocre within them. If a South East PTE was to be set up, for want of a better term, it would almost certainly be London-centric. There would therefore be, from what I can see, an increase in local tax for little local benefit. Mind you, bringing back Network SouthEast, so long as it wasn't accompanied by massive increases in council tax, wouldn't be particularly unwelcome, and I don't see why it would be incompatible with TfL taking on revenue risk for local services around London in the same way as Merseytravel taking on revenue risk[1] for their sponsored PTE services didn't affect adversely the fact that many of their services run outside their boundaries. [1] Which they've now relinquished to SercoNed, as I recall. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
National rail south east - any single engineering works source? | London Transport | |||
De Menezes casually picks up a Metro, rushes for a tube then gets killed - photo of body | London Transport | |||
Greater say on trains | London Transport | |||
Park & Ride in Greater London | London Transport | |||
South West Trains over District Line south of East Putney | London Transport |