"Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, is preparing to submit a bid next
year to take over most of Southern, one of the biggest train franchises,
from 2009. He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter
trains that terminate in the capital, including those that start their
journeys well beyond Greater London."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2903879.ece

ESB

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:09:05 +0000, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:

"Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, is preparing to submit a bid next
year to take over most of Southern, one of the biggest train franchises,
from 2009. He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter
trains that terminate in the capital, including those that start their
journeys well beyond Greater London."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2903879.ece

There is a precedent on a far smaller scale of Merseyrail, which
operates outside the boundaries of the PTE...

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:09:05 +0000, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:

"Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, is preparing to submit a bid next
year to take over most of Southern, one of the biggest train franchises,
from 2009. He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter
trains that terminate in the capital, including those that start their
journeys well beyond Greater London."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2903879.ece

There is a precedent on a far smaller scale of Merseyrail, which
operates outside the boundaries of the PTE...


"He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter trains that
terminate in the capital, including those that start their journeys well
beyond Greater London."

How far is well beyond Greater London? Looking at the SWML, might it be
Portsmouth, Southampton or Bournemouth? On the WCML might it be Coventry or
Birmingham? Or are these not actually 'commuter trains' after all, despite
being full of pax going to London every day...

Oh and I see he's going to have all of 2 new TfL board members to look after
whatever this area turns out to be?

Paul

On Nov 20, 11:40 am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Neil Williams" wrote in message

...

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:09:05 +0000, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:

"Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, is preparing to submit a bid next
year to take over most of Southern, one of the biggest train franchises,
from 2009. He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter
trains that terminate in the capital, including those that start their
journeys well beyond Greater London."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2903879.ece

There is a precedent on a far smaller scale of Merseyrail, which
operates outside the boundaries of the PTE...

"He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter trains that
terminate in the capital, including those that start their journeys well
beyond Greater London."

How far is well beyond Greater London? Looking at the SWML, might it be
Portsmouth, Southampton or Bournemouth? On the WCML might it be Coventry or
Birmingham? Or are these not actually 'commuter trains' after all, despite
being full of pax going to London every day...


I suspect that's iffy journalism. In the past he's expressed an
interest in taking over the inner suburban services that terminate a
few stops outside the boundary (Sevenoaks, Cheshunt, Shenfield, Slough
etc). This, I suspect, is what the zone 7-9 thing is all about.

But I can't see him going for regional or intercity trains. I think
basically he just wants to turn the inner suburban services into an S-
Bahn network, which strikes me as a rather good idea.

Jonn

unrealpolitik ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

"He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter trains
that terminate in the capital, including those that start their
journeys well beyond Greater London."

How far is well beyond Greater London? Looking at the SWML, might it be
Portsmouth, Southampton or Bournemouth? On the WCML might it be
Coventry or Birmingham? Or are these not actually 'commuter trains'
after all, despite being full of pax going to London every day...

I suspect that's iffy journalism. In the past he's expressed an interest
in taking over the inner suburban services that terminate a few stops
outside the boundary (Sevenoaks, Cheshunt, Shenfield, Slough etc).

Umm, he already DOES control trains which reach outside the London
boroughs...

wrote in message
...
On Nov 20, 11:40 am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Neil Williams" wrote in message

...

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:09:05 +0000, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote:

"Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, is preparing to submit a bid
next
year to take over most of Southern, one of the biggest train
franchises,
from 2009. He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter
trains that terminate in the capital, including those that start their
journeys well beyond Greater London."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2903879.ece

There is a precedent on a far smaller scale of Merseyrail, which
operates outside the boundaries of the PTE...

"He is also drawing up plans to take control of all commuter trains that
terminate in the capital, including those that start their journeys well
beyond Greater London."

How far is well beyond Greater London? Looking at the SWML, might it be
Portsmouth, Southampton or Bournemouth? On the WCML might it be Coventry
or
Birmingham? Or are these not actually 'commuter trains' after all,
despite
being full of pax going to London every day...


I suspect that's iffy journalism. In the past he's expressed an
interest in taking over the inner suburban services that terminate a
few stops outside the boundary (Sevenoaks, Cheshunt, Shenfield, Slough
etc). This, I suspect, is what the zone 7-9 thing is all about.

But I can't see him going for regional or intercity trains. I think
basically he just wants to turn the inner suburban services into an S-
Bahn network, which strikes me as a rather good idea.


That was my understanding of the DfT announcement on the subject somw while
ago.

Other iffy journalism:

"For the first time on the national rail network, passengers are able to use
Oyster electronic payment cards." - only if you ignore the previous list of
NR/TfL 'parallel routes' completely, eg Chiltern/Met etc

"Some fares have been halved." - makes a good quote, but really only valid
if you assume that pax usually buy standard NR singles in both directions,
rather than standard day returns, cheap day returns, railcard discounts etc
etc... Using the fares to and from Watford Junction discussed the other
day, typical Oyster savings might be about 10p on a CDR, 70p on a day
return.

There is a certain naiivity too - assumptions that TfL will be able to
increase the frequency of services on current commuter routes simply by a
change of ownership?

Paul

On Nov 20, 12:20 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

There is a certain naiivity too - assumptions that TfL will be able to
increase the frequency of services on current commuter routes simply by a
change of ownership?


I think it's more likely. If the railways are regulated by TfL there's
more of an incentive to treat them as a public service. Some of the
privatized rail franchises have been very good at investing to improve
their routes (Chiltern, for example), but others have done
extraordinarily little. Why should they make huge capital investments
to double the frequency when the extra fares won't necessarily pay for
it? This isn't a hit against them, it's just normal business.

Whereas if they're privately run but publically regulated, the
contracts can be drawn up in such a way that the franchisees are given
financial incentives to run the extra services.

This doesn't mean it will happen, or that TfL will do the job well if
it does. But I can see the theory.

Jonn Elledge

wrote in message
...
On Nov 20, 12:20 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

There is a certain naiivity too - assumptions that TfL will be able to
increase the frequency of services on current commuter routes simply by a
change of ownership?


I think it's more likely. If the railways are regulated by TfL there's
more of an incentive to treat them as a public service. Some of the
privatized rail franchises have been very good at investing to improve
their routes (Chiltern, for example), but others have done
extraordinarily little. Why should they make huge capital investments
to double the frequency when the extra fares won't necessarily pay for
it? This isn't a hit against them, it's just normal business.


Its basically because any TOC that has come up with plans to vastly increase
capacity, like SWT did back in 2003, required huge investment in the
infrastructure. More capacity into Waterloo requires things like more
platforms, longer platforms, resignalling etc. Frequency isn't much of a
problem between Clapham Junction and Waterloo, after all.

None of the infrastructure aspects are in a TOCs own control - so any
criticism should be levelled at the DfT really...

Paul

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:20:12 -0000, Paul Scott wrote:

Other iffy journalism:

"Some fares have been halved." - makes a good quote, but really only valid
if you assume that pax usually buy standard NR singles in both directions,
rather than standard day returns, cheap day returns, railcard discounts etc
etc...

Not really. Even if only single fares have been halved, it's still
true to say that some fares have been halved.

Besides, there are journeys for which both singles and returns have
been more than halved. (Example: Canonbury to Finsbury Park - was
£3.00 single, £4.60 return, now £1.00 single, £2.00 return.)

Paul Scott wrote:

There is a certain naiivity too - assumptions that TfL will be able to
increase the frequency of services on current commuter routes simply by a
change of ownership?

True, although by treating the railways as a service they might be able to
bring more consistency about when late night services stop.