On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

I have lived in London for 10 years now - if I want to go out for the
night, I get the night bus home and have never used a cab. It's not a
problem and never has been, so why all the clamour to have a train
service running anyway?

The Mayor put it in his manifesto.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

I have lived in London for 10 years now - if I want to go out for the
night, I get the night bus home and have never used a cab. It's not a
problem and never has been, so why all the clamour to have a train
service running anyway?

The Mayor put it in his manifesto.



I'm sure the manifesto mentioned it running later. Didn't Steve Norris
promise to have it running all night (maybe in 2000)?

But if he had won and then said "by the way, in order to have it
running all night it won't run in the day any more", people might have
felt a bit cheated.

On 1 May 2006 12:58:49 -0700, "MIG" wrote:


Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

I have lived in London for 10 years now - if I want to go out for the
night, I get the night bus home and have never used a cab. It's not a
problem and never has been, so why all the clamour to have a train
service running anyway?

The Mayor put it in his manifesto.

I'm sure the manifesto mentioned it running later. Didn't Steve Norris
promise to have it running all night (maybe in 2000)?

Steve Norris may have promised it but he could not have delivered it.
I'm afraid I really struggle to see the point in the tube running later
at weekends when, as others have said, there is a generally very good
night bus network. There are some gaps but it would take little effort
and a damn sight less expense to create those extra night buses than
what later tubes will cost. Don't be surprised if the word "strike"
appears between now and whenever it is implemented.

But if he had won and then said "by the way, in order to have it
running all night it won't run in the day any more", people might have
felt a bit cheated.

Indeed but that is not what is happening here. There is some loss of
service which I still think is daft but thankfully not the original
proposal for Sunday mornings. Having flown into Heathrow in the early
morning and been faced with the current Sunday service I could not
imagine how anyone could contemplate starting it even later.

I don't quite understand how you service a 24 hour city by reducing the
tube service in the early part of that 24 hour period when lots of
people are out and about to get the engine of commerce started that
drives so much related economic activity.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On 1 May 2006 12:58:49 -0700, "MIG" wrote:


Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

snippitty Don't be surprised if the word "strike"
appears between now and whenever it is implemented.

Indeedy, in fact I've already had one of my drivers asking me when the later
finishing times were agreed with the unions...
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.