(Huge) wrote in :

Steve writes:
Ade V wrote in
news:MPG.1990e1503aa60134989df0@slave:

It would seem that Ken has had to pay Crapita £31 mill, because the
poor ickle darlings weren't making as much money as they'd hoped for.
Why? Because (a) the in-zone traffic as fallen by 16%, not the 10-15%
forecast, and (b) less penalty fines are being dished out (whether due
to the fundamental honesty of British drivers, or due to Crapita's
legendary incompetence, is not made clear)

Full story he
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_804435.html



"Steve Norris, the Tory candidate for London Mayor, said: "There was
always a paradox at the heart of the scheme: the more successful it was
in deterring drivers, the less money would be available for public
transport."

Doh-oh! Steve, if people are not paying the charge but still coming into
London perhaps they are paying to use public transport.

Err, no. They're just not coming, period.

See http://www.tfl.gov.uk/pdfdocs/cc/cc-...nth-report.pdf

i.e.

2.5. The majority of ex car-users have transferred to public transport

The same article had a list
of PT projects which have been postponed or scrapped because of lack of
funds. Oddly, you didn't quote that.

Err no there isn't

There are a number of people on these newsgroups, myself included, who
simply will not visit a town where cars are discouraged. You only have
to look at the festering pit that is central Bedford to see that I am
not alone.

Whatever, not really relevant when "The majority of ex car-users have
transferred to public transport" though. So PT benefits from extra revenue
and better journey times.

So in what way does your reply help Norris?