Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7387113.stm
"That's why from 1 June the drinking of alcohol will be banned from the tube, tram, bus, and Docklands Light Railway." Have they forgotten the 'Overground' then? Will crowds flock to mainline terminals with bars on the concourses? Is this a real problem? Paul |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul Scott wrote:
From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7387113.stm "That's why from 1 June the drinking of alcohol will be banned from the tube, tram, bus, and Docklands Light Railway." Have they forgotten the 'Overground' then? Will crowds flock to mainline terminals with bars on the concourses? Is this a real problem? Paul Spotted the Overground wasn't there too, which begs the question what happens on joint routes like Richmond-Gunnersbury and Queens Park-Harrow & Wealdstone. He presumably doesn't have the power on Network Rail (there are presumably routes wholly within London you can still *buy* booze on the train, surely?), but I've no idea what powers he actually has to do this (he does have them, presumably?). Then there's the question of enforcement, of course. Tom |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 7 May, 12:27, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Is this a real problem? No, but it's a good excuse for pompous moralising. See also the ramble about privilege and individual responsibility at the end of this press release: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/8162.aspx Serves us right for electing a tory. U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mr Thant wrote:
On 7 May, 12:27, "Paul Scott" wrote: Is this a real problem? No, but it's a good excuse for pompous moralising. See also the ramble about privilege and individual responsibility at the end of this press release: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/8162.aspx Serves us right for electing a tory. What exactly is your problem with requiring kids to behave with reasonable civility in return for the privilege of free travel? -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On May 7, 12:27 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote: From:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7387113.stm "That's why from 1 June the drinking of alcohol will be banned from the tube, tram, bus, and Docklands Light Railway." Have they forgotten the 'Overground' then? Will crowds flock to mainline terminals with bars on the concourses? Is this a real problem? Paul Hmm. I can't honestly say that I've seen an awefully large number of people drinking on public transport, either tube or bus, in the few years that I've been living in the capital. More public transport journeys are pretty short, so there's rarely enough time for even the most light-weighted drinker to become drunk. Ofcourse I've seen plently of trouble on public transport involving drunk people, but they were all already drunk before boarding, something that Boris' new legislation will do nothing to prevent. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Tom Barry" wrote in message ... Paul Scott wrote: From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7387113.stm "That's why from 1 June the drinking of alcohol will be banned from the tube, tram, bus, and Docklands Light Railway." Have they forgotten the 'Overground' then? Will crowds flock to mainline terminals with bars on the concourses? Is this a real problem? Paul Spotted the Overground wasn't there too, which begs the question what happens on joint routes like Richmond-Gunnersbury and Queens Park-Harrow & Wealdstone. He presumably doesn't have the power on Network Rail (there are presumably routes wholly within London you can still *buy* booze on the train, surely?), but I've no idea what powers he actually has to do this (he does have them, presumably?). Interesting point - I'd just put it down to a cockup. More confirmation that LO is still part of the National Network perhaps. In your example Richmond definitely is - would Gunnersbury be a Network Rail station leased and run by LU or LO? Paul S |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul Scott wrote:
Interesting point - I'd just put it down to a cockup. More confirmation that LO is still part of the National Network perhaps. In your example Richmond definitely is - would Gunnersbury be a Network Rail station leased and run by LU or LO? Paul S NR station managed by LU I think. It had Oyster readers long before LO was launched. Tom |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
James wrote:
Hmm. I can't honestly say that I've seen an awefully large number of people drinking on public transport, either tube or bus, in the few years that I've been living in the capital. More public transport journeys are pretty short, so there's rarely enough time for even the most light-weighted drinker to become drunk. Ofcourse I've seen plently of trouble on public transport involving drunk people, but they were all already drunk before boarding, something that Boris' new legislation will do nothing to prevent. That's it in a nutshell - I saw someone perfectly well behaved with a can of Magners on the tube into town last Friday, then came home myself on a bus after a birthday night out, obviously without a drop of booze *on* me, but with the Electric Soup lapping the tonsils. It's not people drinking on the tube you need to worry about, it's people being drunk *and misbehaving*, which I'm sure was already covered by various offences. Look at it this way - if I go to the pub and have ten pints of ******* Strength Lager, then buy a can of Coke, get on the tube and drink it, Boris says I'm fine. If I go to the pub and have ten Cokes, then buy a can of ******* Strength Lager, get on the tube and drink it, I get collared. What's the logic in that? Which case is more likely to lead to a public nuisance? In which case am I even over the drink drive limit, for heaven's sake? I get the fearful impression Boris is indeed cracking on with his promises and actually believed the rubbish his campaign put out. This may well be more dangerous than the cynical politician who says what he thinks will get him elected, then bins it and does what he wants when the feet are under the desk. Tom |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 7 May, 12:27, "Paul Scott" wrote:
From:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7387113.stm "That's why from 1 June the drinking of alcohol will be banned from the tube, tram, bus, and Docklands Light Railway." Have they forgotten the 'Overground' then? Will crowds flock to mainline terminals with bars on the concourses? Is this a real problem? Paul Do you think Thames Clippers will be affected by the alcohol ban. They sell alcohol on board. A bottle of becks on the deck of a boat down to Woolwich on a sunny evening was one of lifes little pleasures. No more I suppose Rob |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tom Barry wrote:
Paul Scott wrote: Interesting point - I'd just put it down to a cockup. More confirmation that LO is still part of the National Network perhaps. In your example Richmond definitely is - would Gunnersbury be a Network Rail station leased and run by LU or LO? NR station managed by LU I think. It had Oyster readers long before LO was launched. It was managed by Silverlink previously. LU only took over the managment when LO was launched. I assume that formally it's still owned by Network Rail. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Diesel ban in 4 cities steps up pressure for ban in London | London Transport | |||
Crossrail unveils its first completed tunnel | London Transport | |||
Boris Johnson breaks his pledge to run Tube trains later at weekends - Evening Standard | London Transport | |||
Increasing tube capacity Boris Johnson style | London Transport | |||
Alcohol | London Transport |