"Arthur Figgis" ] wrote in message
...
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 18:11:26 +0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 00:43 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
In article .com,
(Richard Adamfi) wrote:
If you think it is a con, blame the TOCs for not accepting Oyster,
rather than Ken/TfL.
The TOCs were forced by the Government not to adopt Oyster because it was
not Standards-compliant.
This is news to me - where did you get this snippet of information from?
The standards problem has been in the railway press - probably in
Modern Railways and elsewhere.
Also mentioned by the mayor here
http://mqt.london.gov.uk//public/question.do?id=12553. I can see where the
TOC's are coming from on this issue, it seems Livingston is insisting they
pay for the 'retailing and validation capability' of oyster installation in
stations when the dft is developing (presumably still a work in progress) a
separate system for the rest of the UK, which they will be installing a few
years later.
And then here http://mqt.london.gov.uk//public/question.do?id=13087
Livingston lays down the costs. TfL is hardly short of cash, if £60m is all
it would take for implementation why can't he just get on with it?. He's not
exactly known for being prudent and to argue over a relatively small project
(cost wise) with such large potential benefits seems incredibly petty.