On 15 Mar, 20:49, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:
In message om,
Mizter T writes
I've personally no objection to people using the NLL to lug stuff
around, off-peak - after all they're letting the train take the strain
whereas otherwise they might be another car owner or car driver
clogging the roads up. Let the frontier spirit continue!
I don't travel on it off peak, all my experiences are between
8 and 9 in the morning and 5.30 to 7(ish) of an evening. The
guys with the flat packs were on already crowded trains. Plus despite it
being Eco friendly the mix of flesh and push bikes is an accident
waiting to happen.
Agreed - it would be better for people to avoid bringing loads of
stuff on at peak times, though I suppose that some people's busy lives
could make it difficult to avoid.
Bikes definitely shouldn't be allowed on at peak times - and I speak
not as a bicycle hater but as a keen cyclist - when it's busy the
space available should be for people! Bizarrely I note that Silverlink
don't appear to have any policy banning bikes on the NLL at peak times
[1], which is pretty silly.
(1) the buses are probably already carrying a number of passengers on
journeys that could be done on the NLL, thus relieving a bit of the
strain on the route
The problem is that despite raising the congestion charge and enlarging
the area, all most of us can see from Ken in the way of transport
improvement is buses.... buses the numbers of which even God hasn't seen
before :-) Then Ken made it 2 quid to get on them !
Please understand that the following comment isn't me trying to be
belligerent, it really isn't, but if someone is paying £2 for a bus
fare on more than a few occasions then they're being a bit of a mug.
£1 with Oyster, or £1 with a Bus Saver ticket (sold as a carnet of 6
for £6).
And they really have improved significantly - a significant
improvement that was much needed, and as the rising passenger numbers
suggest that it has been much appreciated.
Buses are of course only one part the transport mix - in a way they
are a quick win, improving rail services (both under and overground
ones) is a much harder ask. However so far I've been fairly impressed
with the Mayor's efforst on both these fronts, given the limitations
he has - the PPP was unwillingly foisted upon him, and the Mayor only
has limited powers with regards to overground rail - but he's pushed
hard to get involved anyway, and has funded improvements all over
London to stations and will be taking direct control of the NLL and
other passenger services come November.
Also bear in mind that the bulk of TfL's funding doesn't come from the
Congestion Charge, nor from the GLA's council tax levy, but from a
grant from central government.
I absolutely agree that it looks like it needs to be done, but I think
TfL will want to get their feet under the table first before they
start making demands for more money from the government - I'm sure
this explains the silence on this issue from TfL so far. Be certain
though that the bods at TfL Rail - and indeed the Mayor - are aware of
the state of the NLL, and are laying out their plans as we speak.
Will the public be that patient and understanding ? Or will it be an
acolyte of Mr Cameron trying to sort the mess out ?
Ha! Mr Cameron's Mayor Idol style selection process didn't appear to
be a great success did it. We shall see, though at present I find it
hard to see the winner of the next Mayoral election wearing a blue
rosette, though of course the voters might be up for a change from Ken
next time. Of course it's not unfeasible for a future successful
candidate to be an independent, or at least allied to neither of the
two parties - after all that's what happened the first time round! I'd
still put my money on Ken winning it again though - my half baked and
completely unoriginal theory is that his objectors make a lot of
noise, whilst his supporters are far quieter - his rebelliousness and
outsider status appeal to many Londoners.
The really interesting potential future development is what will
happen when the Mayor and the central government are of a different
political hue - for example a Cameron government and a Mayor Ken.
There's an awful lot of interplay between central government and the
Mayor/GLA, not least in terms of flows of money. However I'd say it
would be unlikely that a Cameron government would squeeze TfL's grant
significantly in anything like a similar manner to how Thatcher
squeezed the GLC.
Going back to your point as to whether the public will be
understanding - bear in mind that the Mayor has no real power over the
NLL at this point in time anyway. Direct control starts in November. I
imagine that improvements will be seen pretty quickly, and over time
the Mayor will make clear that he is fighting for a better deal for
NLL passengers by trying to get extra funding from the government for
major NLL improvements.
Of course in a sense this is in part a mess of Livingstone's own
making - but one he might even be proud of. In the 1980's the GLC,
under Ken, pushed for better utilisation of rail routes around Greater
London, at the time of course all under the control of British Rail.
One of the GLC's pet projects, to which they committed funding, was
the creation of the present day North London Line - of course it's not
a new railway, but the through orbital passenger service from
Stratford to Richmond was a new creation. This created the modern day
NLL, the very NLL that is now a victim of its own success.
-----
[1] Silverlink Cycle Policy
http://www.silverlink-trains.com/tem...ic.aspx?id=489