Tony Polson wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

It probably makes little difference for the rail network, as it is
highly centred on London, with the minor exceptions of such animals as
Gatwick - Tonbridge, Ashford - Hastings etc.



It makes a lot of difference when you consider that a substantial
proportion of commuters using these "highly centred on London"
services actually live outside the capital and have no representatives
on the GLA and no say in the election of the Mayor.

No taxation without representation ...

Someone said it would be better to have a SE rail authority rather than
a "central London dominated" TfL - but since the rail network is central
London dominated, from that point of view, there isn't much of a
difference, as a SE rail authority would be London-dominated anyway.

It was theoretical anyway; I wouldn't advocate giving the whole of NSE
to TfL. I do think it would make more sense for them to have greater
control over inner suburban services though, even if those do stray
outside the GLA boundary - the idea is to make sure that transport into
London is co-ordinated properly.


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London