Dave Jackson wrote:
I'm surprised that he hasn't made a contribution to the Merseyrail
discussion, since he was involved in the construction/design of the loop
line, IIRC.


While still unqualified, I worked on the Loop Line project for a
summer vacation in a menial role. I was based at Moorfields so my
knowledge of what happened at Central is minimal and gained mostly
from reading "Modern Railways" four decades ago.

I have little or nothing to add to what has already been said. Without
looking at as-built drawings of the Loop Line at Central or visiting
the site, it would be impossible for me (or anyone else without
personal knowledge) to verify any of the claims of pre-existing
tunnels, platforms etc. which have been made here.

But to cheer everyone up, here's a link to an image of the Loop Line
platform and a train at Liverpool Central:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:50...oolCent-01.jpg

Just to throw a spanner in the works, the following web page suggests
that the original Liverpool Central Low level station that previously
served as the terminus of the Mersey Railway was actually re-used for
the Link Line, which is now known as the Northern Line despite serving
much of South Liverpool. Now I'm really confused!
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/l...l/index2.shtml

"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote:

Bruce wrote:

I never denied that he was the Chancellor who took us in, although support
for the move and at that particular level was widespread in political and
economic circles at the time largely as a means to control inflation.

On the contrary, inflation should have been controlled *before*
entering the ERM.

Which was partially attempted but the ERM was seen as a tool that would help
the job.


Not so. There were strict rules for joining the ERM that involved a
ceiling on the rate of inflation and a ceiling on the percentage of
GDP represented by a country's fiscal deficit. Both these rules were
broken or waived (your choice) to allow the UK to enter the ERM.

When Greece joined the Euro, the same blind eye was turned to Greece's
complete inability to meet the entry conditions, and by a large
margin. Only a fool repeats the same actions over again and expects
the consequences to be different.

Ironically, joining the ERM (and eventual membership of the Euro) was
sold by its protagonists to the Great British Public on the basis that
it would end boom and bust. Now, in 2012, we can see Germany has an
unprecedented boom and Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Greece are bust.
So much for the Euro.



As when Greece joined the Euro some years later,
the rules were bent to allow the UK to join the ERM and the result was
a political and economic disaster. Do we never learn?

Unfortunaely not. The history of 20th century British economic policy is
full of attempts to enter exchange rate schemes, often at rates that turned
out to be bad but which the consensus of opinion of the time fully
supported. The return to the Gold Standard in the 1920s at the pre-war rate
was another.


Absolutely.


The UK's entry to the ERM was entirely a political construct. We
entered at the wrong time and at the wrong exchange rate, purely to
satisfy the Europhile wing of the Tory party. Thanks to the ensuing
disaster, most of the Tory party has now seen sense and there are only
a small number of Europhiles left.

It is rewriting of history, which you accuse others of, to claim it was just
to satisfy Conservative Europhiles. It was the widespread political and
economic consensus of the day that the UK should strive to enter the ERM at
that rate.


There was no such consensus. In politics, the Labour Party was
horribly split on the issue, as were the Conservatives. Only the
LibDems were consistently pro-ERM and pro-Euro. In economics, there
was no sign of any consensus. As usual, of you asked ten economists
the same question, they would come up with ten very different but
equally well-argued answers.

I think all that can be said was that, at the time of ERM entry, the
Tories were more pro than anti. Labour was split to an extent that
was never tested. There may have been a slight majority of economists
in favour. But to say that there was 'a widespread political and
economic consensus' is stretching the point beyond credibility.

Still, some historian somewhere will no doubt include it in a book or
paper to be argued about for years to come. I suppose that rewriting
history is actually part of a historian's job. ;-)

Bruce wrote:

Just to throw a spanner in the works, the following web page suggests
that the original Liverpool Central Low level station that previously
served as the terminus of the Mersey Railway was actually re-used for
the Link Line, which is now known as the Northern Line despite serving
much of South Liverpool. Now I'm really confused!
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/l...l/index2.shtml

This is correct. It serves much more of north Liverpool than it does south
Liverpool.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

Neil Williams wrote:

Bruce wrote:

Just to throw a spanner in the works, the following web page suggests
that the original Liverpool Central Low level station that previously
served as the terminus of the Mersey Railway was actually re-used for
the Link Line, which is now known as the Northern Line despite serving
much of South Liverpool. Now I'm really confused!
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/l...l/index2.shtml

This is correct. It serves much more of north Liverpool than it does south
Liverpool.


Speaking as someone who was brought up in South Liverpool, I expected
a line serving my area to be named after it, not after some remote
parts of rural Lancashire that I had no interest in at all. ;-)

Bruce wrote:

Speaking as someone who was brought up in South Liverpool, I expected
a line serving my area to be named after it, not after some remote
parts of rural Lancashire that I had no interest in at all. ;-)

Cross City Line might have been a better term, though that would have
clashed with the City Line, or even Crossrail? Or we could go London style
and call it the "Huntskirkportby line"

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

Neil Williams wrote:

Bruce wrote:

Speaking as someone who was brought up in South Liverpool, I expected
a line serving my area to be named after it, not after some remote
parts of rural Lancashire that I had no interest in at all. ;-)

Cross City Line might have been a better term, though that would have
clashed with the City Line, or even Crossrail? Or we could go London style
and call it the "Huntskirkportby line"


Loop Line, Link Line and City Line all seemed fine to me. Then some
fancypants came along, probably someone from London, and wanted one to
be the Northern Line.

Should have been given a lashing and sent back south. ;-)

On 06/06/2012 20:04, Bruce wrote:
While still unqualified, I worked on the Loop Line project for a
summer vacation in a menial role. I was based at Moorfields so my
knowledge of what happened at Central is minimal and gained mostly
from reading "Modern Railways" four decades ago.

I used Central LL regularly in the 60s (work in Liverpool, girlfriend in
Bromborough), and remember it as a rather dirty depressing place. Trains
came up from the tunnel under the Mersey, dropped off their passengers,
ran forward into the reversing sidings (2, IIRC, one often containing a
spare unit), and then emerged into the dim light of the Birkenhead-bound
platform.

--
Dave,
Frodsham
http://s1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc461/Davy41/

Dave Jackson wrote:
I used Central LL regularly in the 60s (work in Liverpool, girlfriend in
Bromborough), and remember it as a rather dirty depressing place. Trains
came up from the tunnel under the Mersey, dropped off their passengers,
ran forward into the reversing sidings (2, IIRC, one often containing a
spare unit), and then emerged into the dim light of the Birkenhead-bound
platform.


I worked in Liverpool, lived in South Liverpool and - what a
coincidence - also had a girlfriend in Bromborough. It was the 1970s,
though. Obviously not the same girl. ;-)

I used to travel by motorcycle and was pleased when the new (Wallasey)
Kingsway tunnel opened in 1971 together with the M53, as it made my
journey to Bromborough much faster than via Queensway (old tunnel) and
the A41.

Ironic that I now live just off the A41, but a lot further south.

I was a frequent user of Liverpool Central High Level until it closed
for construction of the Loop and Link lines. It was all-DMU in those
days and the formerly grand station looked rather forlorn. But what
replaced it was even worse. New, yes, but still worse.

In message , Bruce
writes
Loop Line, Link Line and City Line all seemed fine to me. Then some
fancypants came along, probably someone from London, and wanted one to
be the Northern Line.
Should have been given a lashing and sent back south. ;-)
The Northern line in London goes the furthest south.
--
Clive

On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 03:58:52PM +0000, d wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 08:46:53 -0700 (PDT)
e27002 wrote:
John Major started the ball rolling with regard to peace in Northern
Ireland. Regardless of his failings, we should all be grateful for
his work in this regard.
Major's problem was the media. Because he was subdued and somewhat introvert
and not a loud shouty egomaniac like most media types they portrayed him as a
dull idiot when he's anything but.

Oh Christ, I agree with Boltar. Must be something wrong with me.

The Lib Dems today have a similar problem. Their positions aren't
simple and catch-phrasey enough for the press, so the press pretend that
they don't have any and are just Tory stooges.

--
David Cantrell | semi-evolved ape-thing

One person can change the world, but most of the time they shouldn't
-- Marge Simpson