On 22 Dec, 21:13, Ian Jelf wrote:
In message
,
Mizter T writes
No, it wouldn't have been more logical because it's simply not in
Silvertown, it is in North Woolwich. Bear in mind that until 44 years
ago this seperate identity would have been very distinctive - one would
have passed from the County Borough of West Ham in the county of Essex
to the Metropolitan Borough of Woolwich in the county of Kent.
Very minor correction:
The Metropolitan Borough of Woolwich was in the County of London, not
Kent. It was in Kent before the creation of the County of London in 1889
but was then simply a parish. Only the County of London's subdivisions
were given the prefix "Metropolitan Borough of.......), a term which
fell out of use with the coming of Greater London in 1965.
(The term Metropolitan Borough was of course resurrected in 1974 for the
subdivisions of the new Metropolitan counties outside London.)
Thank you very much Ian, I stand corrected - that was a rather shoddy
misconception on my part which in retrospect doesn't really make much
sense, given that the boundaries of Kent had significantly retrenched
a long time before the coming of Greater London in '65 when the County
of London was created in 1889.
UIVMM (always possible!) the County Borough of West Ham remained in
the County of Essex but, as a County Borough, was effectively a free
and independent agent outwith the boundaries of the County Council (as
was the later County Borough of *East* Ham). These County Boroughs are
interesting creations, being perhaps somewhat similar to the unitary
authorities of today - albeit these modern day creations perhaps lack
some of the drama that surrounded the inception of some of these
County Boroughs, what with the torrid political power struggles set
against a backdrop of growing urbanisation. Town versus country, we've
been here before!
ob-utl - the County Boroughs of both East and West Ham were both
squarely well within the realms of London Transport ever since the
LTPB's "special area" came into effect in 1933 - though the DLR was
transferred from LRT [1] ownership to that of the LDDC [2] in 1992
after operating problems had reached a crescendo, as central
government though the LDDC could be a more focused custodian of the
railway than the somewhat distracted LRT could manage at the time.
In actual fact I've found something a bit interesting here - I thought
that the DLR came straight back into LRT ownership when the LDDC
dissolved, but it seems that it was actually transferred to the
Sectretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions
(I.e. the now defunct 'super-department' that was the DETR) in March
1998, and only subsequently transferred to TfL shortly after the
creation of that body in July 2000 [3]. I had thought that the DLR had
been returned to LRT ownership in '98, or at least LRT 'control' -
perhaps it was in effect put under LRT control by the DETR during this
two year period.
I presume the period under DETR ownership was only ever intended to be
an interim measure, as the successful London referendum on the
creation of the GLA was shortly thereafter in May 1998, and the period
after that was spent preparing and readying the new mechanisms of
London governance (and arguing about the Tube PPP which the government
was pushing through!). Perhaps the DLR was a fairly autonomous agent
during this period - indeed the transfer of the DLR to away from LRT
to the LDDC was arguably for the best, as during this period the new
DLR management seems to have taken advantage of being freed from the
shackles of the somewhat dysfunctional LRT and forged a new and more
successful path.
Also this period brought with it the involvement of the private sector
- thankfully the dying Conservative government didn't simply privatise
and sell off the DLR in its entirety, instead the system remained in
public ownership [4] whilst instead the operational side of the
railway (both day to day running and maintenance of the infrastructure
- both trains and track) became the responsibility of a franchisee.
This approach seems to have been pretty successful, as it would appear
has the PFI model whereby extensions (starting with Lewisham, then
City Airport and now Woolwich) to the railway are built, owned and
maintained by an infrastructure concessionaire.
Anyway I've gone off on a tangent so I'll stop there. Ian Jelf will
doubtless be along to correct my mistakes in a moment!
-----
[1] LRT being London Regional Transport, the principal precursor body
to TfL, which was a statutory organisation under the ownership and
control of central government, albeit one with a certain degree of
operational independence (though this didn't help the fact that it was
under resourced, with central government never stumping up the money
it needed).
[2] LDDC history website - see 'change of ownership' under the section
concerning the DLR (section 7) in this monograph:
http://www.lddc-history.org.uk/transport/tranmon3.html
[3] Details garnered from written evidence submitted to the Commons
Select Committee on Transport by the DLR:
http://www.publications.parliament.u...78/378we56.htm
[4] "Docklands Light Railway Limited is a small organisation that owns
the assets of DLR. It is also responsible for planning the future
development of the railway [...]"
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/foi/2836.aspx