Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:37:09 UTC, Tony Polson
wrote: "umpston" wrote: You could be so wrong Ian - I certainly hope so. Unfortunately, Ian is very likely to be right. Erm, thanks, I think. The trade unions will make sure that the work doesn't get finished on time unless their members are paid massive "bonuses", and the costs will skyrocket. Every landowner will screw the Olympic organisation for every million they can get. The money set aside for regeneration will have to be raided to pay for all of the above. But above all, does anyone really believe in this regeneration hype in the first place? I mean, if you really wanted to stimulate ecomic recovery somewhere, would you give it a) a nice new industrial estate with tax/rate breaks for incoming companies or b) a velodrome? And if you want a velodrome, do you put it in a) a pleasant convenient location that people might want to go to or b) a festering hell hole? Look at the history of Garden Festivals (have they been given up now?) Gateshead, Liverpool, Glasgow and the one in south Wales (Swansea?) were all supposed to leave revitalised communities behind them and all left areas of wasteland where redevelopment, where it happened, took years. Some of the Glasgow site is still derelict, twenty years on. For that matter, look at the Monster of Greenwich. I think we can safely assume that the people who ran the Olympic bid did very nicely out of it. I think we can assume that the people who run the games project will do very nicely out of it. And I think we can safely assume that the people who live on or near the sites will be ****ed over before and during the games and left to rot afterwards. Ian "Pollyanna" J |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/11/05 17:37, "Tony Polson" wrote:
Great safe prophecies of our time: 1) The London Olympics will be a complete screwup, many times over budget, 2) The supposed regeneration of depreived areas won't happen. Ian You could be so wrong Ian - I certainly hope so. Unfortunately, Ian is very likely to be right. The trade unions will make sure that the work doesn't get finished on time unless their members are paid massive "bonuses", and the costs will skyrocket. Every landowner will screw the Olympic organisation for every million they can get. The money set aside for regeneration will have to be raided to pay for all of the above. My company does a lot of transport planning and strategy work with TfL and the widespread feeling within TfL (and outside) is that the whole Olympic thing is a gravy train just waiting to be jumped on. There are now many interrelated projects regarded as *essential* to the Olympics where money is being hosed around with gay abandon... One day the truth will come out and it won't be pretty |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/11/05 18:03, "Ian Johnston" wrote:
Look at the history of Garden Festivals (have they been given up now?) Gateshead, Liverpool, Glasgow and the one in south Wales (Swansea?) Ebbw Vale. Now largely a business park although some remnants of the garden festival are (well, as of 2 years ago) still visible up the hill |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ian Johnston" wrote:
But above all, does anyone really believe in this regeneration hype in the first place? Only the buggers who spout it, including the politicians and those who led the Olympic bid. I mean, if you really wanted to stimulate ecomic recovery somewhere, would you give it a) a nice new industrial estate with tax/rate breaks for incoming companies or b) a velodrome? And if you want a velodrome, do you put it in a) a pleasant convenient location that people might want to go to or b) a festering hell hole? Look at the history of Garden Festivals (have they been given up now?) Gateshead, Liverpool, Glasgow and the one in south Wales (Swansea?) were all supposed to leave revitalised communities behind them and all left areas of wasteland where redevelopment, where it happened, took years. Some of the Glasgow site is still derelict, twenty years on. For that matter, look at the Monster of Greenwich. I think we can safely assume that the people who ran the Olympic bid did very nicely out of it. I think we can assume that the people who run the games project will do very nicely out of it. And I think we can safely assume that the people who live on or near the sites will be ****ed over before and during the games and left to rot afterwards. Agree 100%. If I was allowed to state more than 100%, I would choose the highest available figure. ;-) London 2012 will be a landmark exercise in institutional corruption at its very best (i.e. worst). |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/11/05 22:26, "Tony Polson" wrote:
London 2012 will be a landmark exercise in institutional corruption at its very best (i.e. worst). So, so true... |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stimpy wrote:
My company does a lot of transport planning and strategy work with TfL and the widespread feeling within TfL (and outside) is that the whole Olympic thing is a gravy train just waiting to be jumped on. There are now many interrelated projects regarded as *essential* to the Olympics where money is being hosed around with gay abandon... One day the truth will come out and it won't be pretty Nothing linked to "New" Labour is remotely pretty. :-( |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/11/05 22:45, "Tony Polson" wrote:
Stimpy wrote: My company does a lot of transport planning and strategy work with TfL and the widespread feeling within TfL (and outside) is that the whole Olympic thing is a gravy train just waiting to be jumped on. There are now many interrelated projects regarded as *essential* to the Olympics where money is being hosed around with gay abandon... One day the truth will come out and it won't be pretty Nothing linked to "New" Labour is remotely pretty. :-( The vibe within TfL is that if you can, by whatever means, associate your project with the Olympics and talk it up to the point where it becomes 'essential', then budgetary constraints seem to evaporate away. The *really* sad thing is that it's obvious which way things are going and we, like many other companies, are faced with a choice - do we turn down lucrative contracts on the grounds that money is being spent unnecessarily or do we just jump on the gravy train? Business is business :-) |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Stimpy
writes On 12/11/05 17:37, "Tony Polson" wrote: Great safe prophecies of our time: 1) The London Olympics will be a complete screwup, many times over budget, 2) The supposed regeneration of depreived areas won't happen. Ian You could be so wrong Ian - I certainly hope so. Unfortunately, Ian is very likely to be right. The trade unions will make sure that the work doesn't get finished on time unless their members are paid massive "bonuses", and the costs will skyrocket. Every landowner will screw the Olympic organisation for every million they can get. The money set aside for regeneration will have to be raided to pay for all of the above. My company does a lot of transport planning and strategy work with TfL and the widespread feeling within TfL (and outside) is that the whole Olympic thing is a gravy train just waiting to be jumped on. There are now many interrelated projects regarded as *essential* to the Olympics where money is being hosed around with gay abandon... One day the truth will come out and it won't be pretty With any luck, they will find that the only way to fund it all is to appropriate the money now pencilled in for the West London Tram. -- Thoss |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stimpy wrote:
The vibe within TfL is that if you can, by whatever means, associate your project with the Olympics and talk it up to the point where it becomes 'essential', then budgetary constraints seem to evaporate away. The *really* sad thing is that it's obvious which way things are going and we, like many other companies, are faced with a choice - do we turn down lucrative contracts on the grounds that money is being spent unnecessarily or do we just jump on the gravy train? Simple. You jump on the gravy train, otherwise someone else will. Business is business :-) Exactly. ;-) |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005, Stimpy wrote:
Stimpy wrote: My company does a lot of transport planning and strategy work with TfL and the widespread feeling within TfL (and outside) is that the whole Olympic thing is a gravy train just waiting to be jumped on. The vibe within TfL is that if you can, by whatever means, associate your project with the Olympics and talk it up to the point where it becomes 'essential', then budgetary constraints seem to evaporate away. The *really* sad thing is that it's obvious which way things are going and we, like many other companies, are faced with a choice - do we turn down lucrative contracts on the grounds that money is being spent unnecessarily or do we just jump on the gravy train? Well, you ought to at least bear in mind that once the landowners have been bought off, it's likely to be downgraded to a gravy tram. Or, horror of horrors, a gravy trolleybus. tom -- limited to concepts that are meta, generic, abstract and philosophical -- IEEE SUO WG |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Oyster Watch - LER Land | London Transport | |||
Rare track/routings in SE-land today | London Transport | |||
Metro-Land | London Transport | |||
Metro-Land | London Transport | |||
LCR plans high-speed line to north | London Transport News |