http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

John Rowland wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

Weird. Areas of the country that *do* want tram schemes have them
refused, and areas that *don't* have them foisted upon them. Is this a
case of 'Nanny knows best?'.

Sid

wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

Weird. Areas of the country that *do* want tram schemes have them
refused, and areas that *don't* have them foisted upon them. Is this a
case of 'Nanny knows best?'.

Sid


Or its within the M25 - Don't the government want these
http://www.goftr.com/view.php used in the provinces so London can get
more trams etc?

Mark B wrote:
wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

Weird. Areas of the country that *do* want tram schemes have them
refused, and areas that *don't* have them foisted upon them. Is this a
case of 'Nanny knows best?'.

Sid


Or its within the M25 - Don't the government want these
http://www.goftr.com/view.php used in the provinces so London can get
more trams etc?


'Press release 8 May 2006:-

'Moir Lockhead, Chief Executive of FirstGroup plc, said: "First is
committed to providing high quality public transport networks. The
signing of this partnership agreement sets the seal on a project that I
firmly believe will introduce a step change in the way that local
transport authorities and operators deliver public travel.'

Press release 15 May 2006

We are very sorry for any inconvenience experienced by our customers as
a result of teething difficulties on ftr.

'We are working hard to make sure that we deliver the highest standards
of service and appreciate your patience as we deal with the issues that
you, our customers, are helpfully bringing to our attention. '

On 2 Jun 2006 06:19:51 -0700, "victormeldrewsyoungerbrother"
wrote:


Mark B wrote:
wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

Weird. Areas of the country that *do* want tram schemes have them
refused, and areas that *don't* have them foisted upon them. Is this a
case of 'Nanny knows best?'.

Sid


Or its within the M25 - Don't the government want these
http://www.goftr.com/view.php used in the provinces so London can get
more trams etc?


'Press release 8 May 2006:-

'Moir Lockhead, Chief Executive of FirstGroup plc, said: "First is
committed to providing high quality public transport networks. The
signing of this partnership agreement sets the seal on a project that I
firmly believe will introduce a step change in the way that local
transport authorities and operators deliver public travel.'

Press release 15 May 2006

We are very sorry for any inconvenience experienced by our customers as
a result of teething difficulties on ftr.

'We are working hard to make sure that we deliver the highest standards
of service and appreciate your patience as we deal with the issues that
you, our customers, are helpfully bringing to our attention. '

Comment on 2 June 2006.

We are very sorry that we chose technology that if anyone with a brain
had been asked to evaluate it we would never have bought. We are also
very sorry that we bought too few buses and cut the frequency compared
to the old service. Finally we are very sorry we could not plan our way
out of a paper bag and this is really why our lovely ftr concept does
not work.

Love and kisses - First Group HQ.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:11:20 +0100, John Rowland wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

Your subject line is a little misleading - there are still hurdles to
clear before it goes ahead.

"asdf" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:11:20 +0100, John Rowland wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

Your subject line is a little misleading - there are still hurdles to
clear before it goes ahead.

Agree - perhaps 'West London Tram _planning_ to go ahead'?

The plans are then still subject to the Transport Secretary approval - see
Liverpool, SE Hants etc etc

Paul

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Paul Scott wrote:

The plans are then still subject to the Transport Secretary approval - see
Liverpool, SE Hants etc etc

It's in London - that won't be a problem.
--
Chris Johns

On 2 Jun 2006 05:36:15 -0700, wrote:

Weird. Areas of the country that *do* want tram schemes have them
refused, and areas that *don't* have them foisted upon them. Is this a
case of 'Nanny knows best?'.

The reason for the difference is as follows:

WLT is in London and would be funded by TfL. TfL likes trams.

Other tram schemes were outside London, and would have been funded by
the DfT. The DfT doesn't like trams.

And in the case of WLT, "nanny" really does know best - the opposition
are a bunch of raving NIMBYs who know nothing about transport
planning. (Normally I wouldn't use such terms, but their arguments are
idiotic enough to justify it.)

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, victormeldrewsyoungerbrother wrote:

'We are working hard to make sure that we deliver the highest standards
of service and appreciate your patience as we deal with the issues that
you, our customers, are helpfully bringing to our attention. '

That reminds me to email them my thoughts on the 'ftr' of travel in York.
--
Chris Johns