On 01/10/2010 11:41, Roy Badami wrote:
On 01/10/10 11:34, Bruce wrote:

"But funding for Crossrail and Tube projects will only be retained if
London mayor Boris Johnson abandons plans to scrap the Western
extension of the congestion charging zone or axes concessionary bus
and tram fares for 16-17 year olds."

Assuming those really are the only two options for saving the necessary
money, I wonder which would be politically more palatable?

Well, 16-17 years olds can't vote...


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On 01/10/2010 11:45, d wrote:
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:34:03 +0100
wrote:
extension of the congestion charging zone or axes concessionary bus
and tram fares for 16-17 year olds."

Why should they get cheaper fares in the first place? Is there something
special about that particular age group?

For the same that reason someone who is studying to try to better
themselves, or who has spent a long day developing cures for cancer, is
expected to both pay and give up their seat to a 65 year old hedge fund
manager who is travelling for free?

Or perhaps because many 16-17 year olds will be in full time education,
but don't qualify for child fares? When I were a lad the final year of
school and then sixth form fell into a big hole between "children" and
"students" (though obviously this was great for anyone who thinks
edukashun is an evil plot by class traitors who betray the proletariat).

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Oct 1, 5:57*pm, "Tim Fenton" wrote:

"Mizter T" wrote:

There are different levels of NMW, depending on your age and whether
you are an apprentice. The current rates a
£5.93 - the main rate for workers aged 21 and over
£4.92 - the 18-20 rate
£3.64 - the 16-17 rate for workers above school leaving age but under
18
£2.50 - the apprentice rate, for apprentices under 19 or 19 or over
and in the first year of their apprenticeship

Thank you kind Sir ;-)

So 16 and 17 year olds get less guaranteed NMW than 18 to 20 year olds, but
they again get less than 21 year olds. 3.64 isn't much, is it? Paying less
for fares must be pretty useful in those circs.

Indeed.

When EMA payments have been delayed in the past I know it's really
stuffed some youngsters and their families up - must admit I dunno
whether the EMA scheme is itself threatened by the cuts.
Info on EMA:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Educatio.../EMA/DG_066951

On Oct 1, 11:34*am, Bruce wrote:
New Civil Engineer reports that the Crossrail project will go ahead
and that the Tube upgrade will not be axed:

"But funding for Crossrail and Tube projects will only be retained if
London mayor Boris Johnson abandons plans to scrap the Western
extension of the congestion charging zone or axes concessionary bus
and tram fares for 16-17 year olds."

Over to you, mophead! *;-)

It has been stated that Crossrail will now use an abandoned Thames
tunnel and railway route towards Abbey Wood. But where are these? I
looked on Streetmap.co.uk but the disused railway lone isn't shown.
Thanks - CJB.

On Oct 1, 9:05*pm, CJB wrote:

On Oct 1, 11:34*am, Bruce wrote:

New Civil Engineer reports that the Crossrail project will go ahead
and that the Tube upgrade will not be axed:

It has been stated that Crossrail will now use an abandoned Thames
tunnel and railway route towards Abbey Wood. But where are these? I
looked on Streetmap.co.uk but the disused railway lone isn't shown.

The plans or route has not changed - some of the recent reporting has
been deficient.

New tunnel under the Thames from North Woolwich to Woolwich, but the
Abbey Wood branch of Crossrail will use the old alignment of the North
London Line from a point west of Custom House to a point between the
old Silvertown and North Woolwich stations - this includes the old
Connaught Tunnel under the Royal Albert Dock (which will be done up).

See
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/custom_house/
and
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/silvertown/
- in particular the 'Brief History' section.

"CJB" wrote in message
...

It has been stated that Crossrail will now use an abandoned Thames
tunnel and railway route towards Abbey Wood.

It's no more than spin, reiterating what is already planned - probably with
an element of confusion by the author of whatever you read.

Crossrail will use the disused Connaught Tunnel between Customs House and
North Woolwich, on the route to Woolwich and Abbey wood. Lately part of the
NLL (that closed in 2006 for DLR Stratford International extension), this
has been the approved route for quite some time.

There is no abandoned Thames tunnel on the line of route.

Paul S

"Mizter T" wrote

The plans or route has not changed - some of the recent reporting has
been deficient.

New tunnel under the Thames from North Woolwich to Woolwich, but the
Abbey Wood branch of Crossrail will use the old alignment of the North
London Line from a point west of Custom House to a point between the
old Silvertown and North Woolwich stations - this includes the old
Connaught Tunnel under the Royal Albert Dock (which will be done up).

It will be at a lower alignment east of the Connaught Tunnel, through
Silvertown station, and this is one reason why there does not seem to be a
prospect of a station to serve City Airport.

Peter

"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...


"Mizter T" wrote

The plans or route has not changed - some of the recent reporting has
been deficient.

New tunnel under the Thames from North Woolwich to Woolwich, but the
Abbey Wood branch of Crossrail will use the old alignment of the North
London Line from a point west of Custom House to a point between the
old Silvertown and North Woolwich stations - this includes the old
Connaught Tunnel under the Royal Albert Dock (which will be done up).

It will be at a lower alignment east of the Connaught Tunnel, through
Silvertown station, and this is one reason why there does not seem to be a
prospect of a station to serve City Airport.

I believe the idea is to provide passive provision for a Crossrail station
somewhere near the safeguarded DLR station position between 'Pontoon Dock'
and 'West Silvertown', perhaps above Connaught Rd? They do explicity state
that the existing Silvertown ex NLL station will be completley demolished.

There is only this small paragraph that I can find in the Crossrail 'east'
route summary:

"Provision is being made in the plans for a future station at
Silvertown, should this ever be required. This would not be on the
current station site, but instead would be further to the west. A DLR
City Airport branch station has been safeguarded very close to here to
provide possible interchange."

Bit of a low profile statement all the same...

Paul S

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
o.uk
On 01/10/2010 11:45, d wrote:
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:34:03 +0100
wrote:
extension of the congestion charging zone or axes concessionary bus
and tram fares for 16-17 year olds."

Why should they get cheaper fares in the first place? Is there
something special about that particular age group?

For the same that reason someone who is studying to try to better
themselves, or who has spent a long day developing cures for cancer,
is expected to both pay and give up their seat to a 65 year old hedge
fund manager who is travelling for free?

H'mm, I'm having trouble imaging a 65 year-old hedge fund manager, let
alone who who travels on the Tube or buses. Much easier to think of a
35 year-old hedge fundie in his Porsche...

On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 16:33:36 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:30:32 on Fri, 1 Oct
2010, d remarked:
No, a student is someone over the school leaving age who is being
educated.

Well I know its trendy and inclusive to call everyone who does some tin pot
part
time course on yoghurt knitting a student but the generally accepted
definition is
someone who goes to *higher* education. Not get-a-clue education for ****wits
who
had just about learnt to write their name when they left school.

What a big chip you have on your shoulder!

Round here, most of the 6th Form Colleges get better A-Level results
than the schools.

I'd call a kid who goes to 6th form college a pupil, not a student. Since
when has A levels been higher education?

B2003