On 31 Dec, 19:04, wrote:
What neither this nor TfL's provision give me is something I can look at
when I don't have access to the internet! That needs to be a document,
albeit possibly electronic as I tend to have my laptop with me, even if
not connected to the net. I can't think how often in the last year I have
dug out that PDF.

This document covers most things:
http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/mayor...fares-2010.pdf

It's worth looking through the introduction text to see what changes
have been made.

U

Mr Thant wrote on 31 December
2009 19:45:46 ...
On 31 Dec, 19:04, wrote:
What neither this nor TfL's provision give me is something I can look at
when I don't have access to the internet! That needs to be a document,
albeit possibly electronic as I tend to have my laptop with me, even if
not connected to the net. I can't think how often in the last year I have
dug out that PDF.

This document covers most things:
http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/mayor...fares-2010.pdf

It's worth looking through the introduction text to see what changes
have been made.

Did the Mayor actually sign that "Request for Mayoral Decision" or were
any changes made? I'm not inclined to trust what is only a proposal.

I urge everyone who is concerned about this to complain vigorously to
TfL and their elected GLA representatives/councillors/members or
whatever they are supposed to be called these days. (It's easier in
Paris where they are just "élus" - the elected ones.)
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Mr Thant wrote:

It's worth looking through the introduction text to see what changes
have been made.

"TfL has seen the biggest fall in journeys for economic reasons in over twenty
years, particularly on the Tube, where demand had fallen by 6%. In total, a fall
in revenues of around £3bn over the course of TfL’s Business Plan to 2017/18 is
now projected. This fall in revenue is also compounded by other pressures,"


Funny how you never saw a statement in past years like "Demand has increased
along with the corresponding revenues, so we need to reduce fares."

On 31 Dec 2009, 23:04, Robert Neville wrote:
Funny how you never saw a statement in past years like "Demand has increased
along with the corresponding revenues, so we need to reduce fares."

Ken just used the money to increase GLA spending.....

In article
,
(Chris) wrote:

On 31 Dec 2009, 23:04, Robert Neville wrote:
Funny how you never saw a statement in past years like "Demand
has increased
along with the corresponding revenues, so we need to reduce
fares."

Ken just used the money to increase GLA spending.....

and service levels, especially on the buses?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Chris wrote:
On 31 Dec 2009, 23:04, Robert Neville wrote:
Funny how you never saw a statement in past years like "Demand has increased
along with the corresponding revenues, so we need to reduce fares."

Ken just used the money to increase GLA spending.....

From the old newt-fancier himself in 2007:

"'I am pleased that the strength of London's economy, and efficiencies
achieved by TfL, mean that fares can now be reduced with no cutback in
the investment programme or financial risk to the transport budget.

'This economic strength and operating efficiency creates benefits that
should be returned to Londoners.' "


Boris has, so he tells us, reduced GLA spending and created a more
efficient TfL, so presumably the fares are reducing...oh, hang on,
they're going up at record rates.

[ignoring the point that TfL's budget is separate from the GLA...]

Tom

In article
,
(Mr Thant) wrote:

On 31 Dec, 19:04, wrote:
What neither this nor TfL's provision give me is something I can look
at when I don't have access to the internet! That needs to be a
document, albeit possibly electronic as I tend to have my laptop with
me, even if not connected to the net. I can't think how often in the
last year I have dug out that PDF.

This document covers most things:

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/mayor...md457-fares-20
10.pdf

It's worth looking through the introduction text to see what changes
have been made.

Thanks. I'll look at that when I get time.

--
Colin Rosenstiel