| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
So suggests this report, based on a meeting of the London Assembly's
Transport Committee - Kent County Council being the active objector to the TfL rail takeover plan in revenge: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 Hopefully it'll be an idea that'll surface again in the future - so long as TfL does a good job on their new West Anglia metro routes. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 09:53:25 +0100
Mizter T wrote: So suggests this report, based on a meeting of the London Assembly's Transport Committee - Kent County Council being the active objector to the TfL rail takeover plan in revenge: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 Hopefully it'll be an idea that'll surface again in the future - so long as TfL does a good job on their new West Anglia metro routes. I can't see how handing it to TfL is going to sort out the endless problems with network rail. Nationalising something isn't a magic panacea. From what I've heard about the anglia routes little has changed so far. -- Spud |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern
|
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 2015\06\10 12:46, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 09:53:25 +0100, Mizter T wrote: So suggests this report, based on a meeting of the London Assembly's Transport Committee - Kent County Council being the active objector to the TfL rail takeover plan in revenge: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 Hopefully it'll be an idea that'll surface again in the future - so long as TfL does a good job on their new West Anglia metro routes. The webcast from the session certainly confirmed Kent's viewpoint. I suspect there were other issues too but this is politics at its worst. However the reps from Kent CC and Surrey CC were much more positive about devolution of some services to TfL *provided* there is proper involvement for them in the decision making process and the scope. Kent set out some "red lines" but the TfL rep present was confident they could be dealt with sensibly or where already controlled by the ORR (the old fear of TfL stealing train paths for trains into Kent). Kent certainly wanted to see Oyster extended into Kent so that was a positive thing. TfL said they would be very happy to work with both Counties in respect of the next franchising round and sorting out what lines / services would be devolved and where the boundaries are. I felt it was positive overall. Are Kent holding out because they want Crossrail to come to them, perhaps? |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... So suggests this report, based on a meeting of the London Assembly's Transport Committee - Kent County Council being the active objector to the TfL rail takeover plan in revenge: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 Hopefully it'll be an idea that'll surface again in the future - so long as TfL does a good job on their new West Anglia metro routes. um, just where is the proof of the statement "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " It just seems to be made up ******** to me tim |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:20:25 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\06\10 12:46, Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 09:53:25 +0100, Mizter T wrote: So suggests this report, based on a meeting of the London Assembly's Transport Committee - Kent County Council being the active objector to the TfL rail takeover plan in revenge: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 Hopefully it'll be an idea that'll surface again in the future - so long as TfL does a good job on their new West Anglia metro routes. The webcast from the session certainly confirmed Kent's viewpoint. I suspect there were other issues too but this is politics at its worst. However the reps from Kent CC and Surrey CC were much more positive about devolution of some services to TfL *provided* there is proper involvement for them in the decision making process and the scope. Kent set out some "red lines" but the TfL rep present was confident they could be dealt with sensibly or where already controlled by the ORR (the old fear of TfL stealing train paths for trains into Kent). Kent certainly wanted to see Oyster extended into Kent so that was a positive thing. TfL said they would be very happy to work with both Counties in respect of the next franchising round and sorting out what lines / services would be devolved and where the boundaries are. I felt it was positive overall. Are Kent holding out because they want Crossrail to come to them, perhaps? No. Crossrail was not mentioned at all. Bizarrely they seem very happy to have HS1 and with South Eastern generally. Rather shows where the franchise priorities are - i.e. not on Metro services. They seem keener now provided the following are met :- a) TfL add capacity at peak times by lengthening trains to the permissible longest length. They don't want train paths reallocated from "their" trains to Metro routes. b) There is no "theft" of train paths from "their" services to TfL ones. This is impossible because ORR control track access. Obviously if there are spare paths and TfL bid for them and South Eastern do not then that's a different scenario. c) There are no adverse or perverse issues relating to fares. They didn't want fares to rise in Kent to somehow "pay" for TfL's takeover. Also they didn't want TfL to introduce cheap fares that then created a shift in commuter patterns causing traffic congestion issues and localised parking problems in the vicinity of a "cheaper" station. Given the DfT have effectively hobbled TfL's ability to lower fares anyway (other than removing the Zone 1 add on fare) this is pretty much a non issue. Kent CC also had a specific question about whether the Metro services that currently run on to Gravesend and Gillingham would be TfL operated or remain with South Eastern or if the service pattern would change. Clearly there wasn't a specific answer to that given. My sense was that these are either non issues because of existing industry controls / processes or else could be solved through discussion. It's over to TfL to try again and hopefully keep people on side. I still think the spectre of airport policy will hang heavy given the government have not set a deadline for responding to the Airports Commission and Boris won't give up either. I thought Boris Island had already been removed from the list of airport extension options under consideration? There are three options on the short list: Gatwick, or the two Heathrow proposals. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
On 2015-06-11 00:10:12 +0000, Paul Corfield said:
[1] Cue the New Train for England, New Bike for England, New Bus for England etc etc [2] [2] cue me leaving the country! ;-) A bit extreme, perhaps. It's an expensive, fancy-looking bus, but it's not *terrible*. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 21:40:31 +0100, "tim....." wrote: "Mizter T" wrote in message ... So suggests this report, based on a meeting of the London Assembly's Transport Committee - Kent County Council being the active objector to the TfL rail takeover plan in revenge: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 Hopefully it'll be an idea that'll surface again in the future - so long as TfL does a good job on their new West Anglia metro routes. um, just where is the proof of the statement "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " It just seems to be made up ******** to me Watch the transport committee webcast and listen to what the reps from Kent CC said. I've watched all 2.5 hours of it and I'm very clear about what was said. Tom Edwards of the BBC was at City Hall during the meeting so he may have put a journalistic flourish on what was said but the basic detail is correct. Kent CC objected to the Estuary Airport and refused to agree to the rail devolution proposal. None of that is contested but where the proof of the link? tim |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 11/06/2015 21:10, tim..... wrote:
"Paul Corfield" wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 um, just where is the proof of the statement "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " It just seems to be made up ******** to me Watch the transport committee webcast and listen to what the reps from Kent CC said. I've watched all 2.5 hours of it and I'm very clear about what was said. Tom Edwards of the BBC was at City Hall during the meeting so he may have put a journalistic flourish on what was said but the basic detail is correct. Kent CC objected to the Estuary Airport and refused to agree to the rail devolution proposal. None of that is contested but where the proof of the link? In the 2 1/2 hour webcast of the committee session that Paul has watched/listened to, and you have not... |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 01:20:07 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote: We must beg to differ. They make me ill [1] and I refuse to travel on They're not *that* bad. God knows I remember some school bus trips back in the day when it was like being in an overheating tumble dryer. Complete waste of money however. The Bendy buses were far more convenient and if it hadn't been for Boris sucking up to the militant cycle lobby who represent nobody apart from themselves and wanting to give Ken 2 fingers london would have got its moneys worth from them. Though I expect by now they'd be life expired anyway or wouldn't meet current pollution regs and would have been pastured off somewhere else. impressed. Constant demands for working air con or opening windows. Didn't you get the memo? Windows that open are so 20th century. Far too simple and convenient - much better to have an expensive technical solution that doesn't work quite as well. -- Spud |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
|
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2015 21:10, tim..... wrote: "Paul Corfield" wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 um, just where is the proof of the statement "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " It just seems to be made up ******** to me Watch the transport committee webcast and listen to what the reps from Kent CC said. I've watched all 2.5 hours of it and I'm very clear about what was said. Tom Edwards of the BBC was at City Hall during the meeting so he may have put a journalistic flourish on what was said but the basic detail is correct. Kent CC objected to the Estuary Airport and refused to agree to the rail devolution proposal. None of that is contested but where the proof of the link? In the 2 1/2 hour webcast of the committee session that Paul has watched/listened to, and you have not... so the claimant should provide a transcript of the relevant bit then expecting someone to watch a 2 and a half hour presentation to accept your point is plain unreasonable. I still think that the link is invented up by someone with a vested interest. I don't believe that elected "officials" would openly admit that they acted out of spite (even if in private, they have)! tim |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
On 2015-06-13 00:14:56 +0000, Paul Corfield said:
God knows what the next Mayor does with them. I know you won't like it, but I'm hoping for "fits new aircon or opening windows and keeps them". While the platform is a gimmick and I would expect them to be OPO in due course, I don't think they are bad in and of themselves, and I don't (except through the heat) have sickness issues on them and would be very interested to know what it is (while I guess you don't know yourself) specifically that causes this. I also think the identity of having a distinct London bus body has a strong aspect to it, though this was sort-of achieved a while ago when almost everything was the old-style Wright Gemini which is a very distinctive body (particularly the front) which became somewhat synonymous with London. I suppose each to their own on such things - I find Class 180 Adelantes on FGW make me feel ill, I think it's down to the lousy ride and wobbly seats. No other UK train has ever done that, though the relatively soft suspension and resulting sway on the Canadian did make me feel queasy to start with, though I got used to it (fortunately, as I was on it for 4 days!) Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 09:48:30 +0100, "tim....." wrote: "Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2015 21:10, tim..... wrote: "Paul Corfield" wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 um, just where is the proof of the statement "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " It just seems to be made up ******** to me Watch the transport committee webcast and listen to what the reps from Kent CC said. I've watched all 2.5 hours of it and I'm very clear about what was said. Tom Edwards of the BBC was at City Hall during the meeting so he may have put a journalistic flourish on what was said but the basic detail is correct. Kent CC objected to the Estuary Airport and refused to agree to the rail devolution proposal. None of that is contested but where the proof of the link? In the 2 1/2 hour webcast of the committee session that Paul has watched/listened to, and you have not... so the claimant should provide a transcript of the relevant bit then expecting someone to watch a 2 and a half hour presentation to accept your point is plain unreasonable. I still think that the link is invented up by someone with a vested interest. I don't believe that elected "officials" would openly admit that they acted out of spite (even if in private, they have)! For goodness sake. You really think I would make it up? No I'm not. I assumed that you quoted someone else's claim I'm actually offended by that. I've no axe to grind given I don't live in South East London and rarely use the trains there. Well I do ... and I don't - because I live in the bit that KCC want to "protect", and ISTM that KCCs view here is entirely sensible. I'm currently suffering a vastly reduced service because the works at LB have meant that fewer SW locals can run, so in order to protect them, my services have had extra stops inserted. I don't want this reduction in service to be perpetuated because TfL take over responsibility after LB is complete and think "that's what their getting now so we don't need to go back to the previous service, and can use the new paths for our own stations" The transcript of the meeting hasn't been provided yet so I can't point you at it. Now go and tell City Hall's Secretariat that they're a bunch of slackers. Meeting agenda with attendees listed. Mr Balfour from Kent is the person to listen to. http://www.london.gov.uk/moderngov/d...20Services.pdf The webcast is at http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor-assem...embly/webcasts 9th June 2015 Transport Committee is the one to watch / listen to. Fast forward to 1 hour 48 mins for the bit on "red lines" and then keep watching to see the ongoing discussion about what happens when TfL take over a service. 2hrs 10min is the point about Kent's objection to previous plans. Oh so I've still got to listen to 30 minutes :-( tim |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 13/06/2015 12:42, Neil Williams wrote: On 2015-06-13 00:14:56 +0000, Paul Corfield said: God knows what the next Mayor does with them. I know you won't like it, but I'm hoping for "fits new aircon or opening windows and keeps them". While the platform is a gimmick and I would expect them to be OPO in due course, [...] Many Boris Bus routes are OPO already (that is, 24/7, rather than partially two manned for some of the day). Two comments on this... (1) Boris made a *big* deal of promising a bus with an open platform that one could hop-on and hop-off. You can't do that if the door is closed. (2) When in OPO mode, the rear door is somewhat restrictive, in part I think because of the need to have the centre grab pole for when the rear open platform is, er, actually open. I think Paul has suggested that there might be structural problems with retro-fitting windows. Retro-fitting aircon isn't necessarily an easy task either, nor cheap - and I doubt it'd so the efficiency credentials of the bus much good. I think the 'Roastmaster' issue might well be the thing that really dogs this bus. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 13/06/2015 09:48, tim..... wrote: [...] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 um, just where is the proof of the statement "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " It just seems to be made up ******** to me Watch the transport committee webcast and listen to what the reps from Kent CC said. I've watched all 2.5 hours of it and I'm very clear about what was said. Tom Edwards of the BBC was at City Hall during the meeting so he may have put a journalistic flourish on what was said but the basic detail is correct. Kent CC objected to the Estuary Airport and refused to agree to the rail devolution proposal. None of that is contested but where the proof of the link? In the 2 1/2 hour webcast of the committee session that Paul has watched/listened to, and you have not... so the claimant should provide a transcript of the relevant bit then expecting someone to watch a 2 and a half hour presentation to accept your point is plain unreasonable. I still think that the link is invented up by someone with a vested interest. I don't believe that elected "officials" would openly admit that they acted out of spite (even if in private, they have)! You're ridiculous. Who is the "claimant" of which you speak - the journalist Tom Edwards who wrote the article? In which case, journalism doesn't work like that - you provide summaries. If you're referring to Paul C, then why on earth should he provide a transcript if you're too distrustful of him and also too lazy to find it yourself. His previous postings clearly show that his analysis has integrity, so he's not just going making something like that up. Also, given two sources corroborate the point - a BBC journalists report and Paul C's summary of the committee hearing - I trust the point. More fool you if you don't. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 13/06/2015 14:04, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 12:42:25 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: On 2015-06-13 00:14:56 +0000, Paul Corfield said: God knows what the next Mayor does with them. I know you won't like it, but I'm hoping for "fits new aircon or opening windows and keeps them". There is no aircon on them. TfL have specifically ruled it out because the extra weight and power requirement would reduce vehicle carrying capacity and increase fuel consumption. This was stated in the TfL Board Paper requesting approval to buy 200 extra vehicles. I think the public don't realise that air con isn't fitted. It's merely air cooling and it doesn't work because of its design and the heat thrown out by the engine on the buses. I think the weight of opening windows plus the squashed upper deck window design mitigates against the use of opening windows. There have been long term rumours about opening windows but I'd have expected to see them before now to be honest - even as a trial on one vehicle. Plenty of opportunity for TfL and Wrightbus to do that. On hot days I think people must realise they don't have aircon fitted! Either that or they think the aircon is faulty or broken... but such an illusion wouldn't hold up to repeated experiences on board. On the Mk2 NB4Ls (the extra 200) TfL have said they will try to improve the ventilation and heat insulation in the vehicles. Unfortunately that doesn't provide a fix for the 608 preceeding vehicles! While the platform is a gimmick and I would expect them to be OPO in due course, The rear open platform is effectively being abolished in the Mk2 design although there will still be three doors. The rearmost door will be a sliding plug type door rather than one that swings inside. TfL have said there will be no crew operation on the extra buses and route 73 is being converted now but is remaining OPO despite being vastly busier than the 10 and 390 which are part crew. I agree that TfL will scrap crew operation as quickly as possible post May 2016 *unless* the new Mayor requires its retention. I expect some people will moan about that and making people redundant is never good but better to do it early in a new term than leave it. Thanks Paul, I'm quite out of date in that case - I hadn't realised there was to be a new Mk2 design with a different design at the back. Blimey Boris is an idiot. All that chat from him about bringing back an open platform. Apparently we will see the Mk2 design fairly soon because the first batch is in build. I don't think they are bad in and of themselves, and I don't (except through the heat) have sickness issues on them and would be very interested to know what it is (while I guess you don't know yourself) specifically that causes this. Heat, noise from the engine and never ending bleeps and announcements, gloom, lack of ventilation, poor seating. I don't agree with the poor seating criticism, not the "never ending bleeps and announcements" - but it's definitely gloomier. Just thinking if the old RMs had an element of that about them too upstairs, not sure. I also think the identity of having a distinct London bus body has a strong aspect to it, though this was sort-of achieved a while ago when almost everything was the old-style Wright Gemini which is a very distinctive body (particularly the front) which became somewhat synonymous with London. I don't really buy that to be honest. I'd rather the bus companies were allowed to keep investing via the route contracting process in modern vehicles. The NB4L is ludicrously heavy compared to the very latest buses coming on the market which are designed for excellent fuel economy and decent comfort / carrying capacity and which can have opening windows! I do recall someone describing it as "the bus for people who don't take buses", in that in part it's all about the exterior image. There were some who wanted this new bus to be a disaster because it was a Boris project. I'm definitely not one of them - not least because people have to travel on them for many years into the future, so I wanted them to work. I'm testing my willingness to give it the benefit of the doubt to the limit. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
On 2015-06-13 13:26:54 +0000, Mizter T said:
I don't agree with the poor seating criticism, not the "never ending bleeps and announcements" - but it's definitely gloomier. Just thinking if the old RMs had an element of that about them too upstairs, not sure. I think they did. I also think the subdued, mostly spot lighting upstairs is classy, rather than gloomy, but I recognise that is a matter of opinion. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Quote:
|
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
Robin9 wrote:
Mizter T;148811 Wrote: Blimey Boris is an idiot. The one thing we all, Paul Corfield, Spud, myself, everyone else, agree on! I don't: I think he's a very smart operator who successfully adopts the guise of a bumbling idiot. He won election, twice, as mayor of a Labour-voting city, and currently has four jobs (as a very highly paid journo, best-selling biographer, the politician with the most direct voters in the UK, and an MP with a majority of 10,695). Despite never having served in government in any capacity, he's frequently spoken of as a future prime minister. He's also rather good at getting things named after himself. Ken spent many years promoting public transport in London, whereas Boris had no previous interest in it before becoming mayor, and will probably lose all interest in it in a year's time. But we have the Boris Bus, Boris Bike, and would-be Boris Island, but no Ken Fare, Ken Train, Ken Card, Ken Tram, etc. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 08:56:57 +0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: But we have the Boris Bus, Boris Bike, and would-be Boris Island, but no Ken Fare, Ken Train, Ken Card, Ken Tram, etc. All that proves is that Boris is a bigger egomaniac than Ken was and he was no shrinking violet. I actually prefer substance to "style" and Ken delivered far more of value and substance. The test of that is that Boris has barely reversed any of Ken's major policy initiatives - especially on transport. All I can give Boris credit for is managing to maintain funding for Crossrail and not cancelling it, South London Line extension to the Overground, sustaining investment in Overground and Tramlink capacity and forcing TfL into releasing Bus Countdown information. There's very little else of merit - the bus network development has lagged behind growth and economic development, the tube is under severe strain and several investments are wrong or have gone wrong, there has been a planning blight of around 6 years which has destoyed momentum in new scheme delivery which will probably result in a gap of 10-12 years in anything substantive happening. Traffic congestion is pretty appalling as is pollution and the Mayor has nothing meaningful to say on this because he essentially believes people can drive where and when they want. Whoever the next Mayor is has some real nasty problems to deal with. It looks like Boris has chosen his successor: fellow old-Etonian Zac, while Boris tries to succeed fellow old-Etonian Dave. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 11:40:59 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote: On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 10:23:54 +0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: Paul Corfield wrote: On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 08:56:57 +0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: But we have the Boris Bus, Boris Bike, and would-be Boris Island, but no Ken Fare, Ken Train, Ken Card, Ken Tram, etc. All that proves is that Boris is a bigger egomaniac than Ken was and he was no shrinking violet. I actually prefer substance to "style" and Ken delivered far more of value and substance. The test of that is that Boris has barely reversed any of Ken's major policy initiatives - especially on transport. All I can give Boris credit for is managing to maintain funding for Crossrail and not cancelling it, South London Line extension to the Overground, sustaining investment in Overground and Tramlink capacity and forcing TfL into releasing Bus Countdown information. There's very little else of merit - the bus network development has lagged behind growth and economic development, the tube is under severe strain and several investments are wrong or have gone wrong, there has been a planning blight of around 6 years which has destoyed momentum in new scheme delivery which will probably result in a gap of 10-12 years in anything substantive happening. Traffic congestion is pretty appalling as is pollution and the Mayor has nothing meaningful to say on this because he essentially believes people can drive where and when they want. Whoever the next Mayor is has some real nasty problems to deal with. It looks like Boris has chosen his successor: fellow old-Etonian Zac, while Boris tries to succeed fellow old-Etonian Dave. Not his choice though is it? It's a party choice and it'll be interesting to see who wins through. Poor old Andew Boff must be seething - is this his third or fourth go at trying to be the candidate? Boris's role was in persuading Zac to stand. If his Richmond constituents back his decision, I think he'd be very likely to win the Tory candidacy, and would then be their best prospect to win the election itself. I agree Mr Goldsmith, if selected, will be a very tough candidate to beat. I also feel Labour are in grave danger of wrecking their prospects. I suspect Zac would easily beat Dame Tessa or Sadiq Khan. But perhaps Labour will choose dark horse charismatic 'transport expert' Christian Wolmar who has, to my surprise (just) made it on to the shortlist. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 2015-06-14 08:23:43 +0000, Robin9 said:
The one thing we all, Paul Corfield, Spud, myself, everyone else, agree on! I don't agree. He may not be all good for London, but I don't believe he is actually an idiot. Quite the contrary - I believe the "buffoonery" is a very deliberate act. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro ser
|
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetroservices
On 14/06/2015 09:56, Recliner wrote: Robin9 wrote: Mizter T wrote: Blimey Boris is an idiot. The one thing we all, Paul Corfield, Spud, myself, everyone else, agree on! I don't: I think he's a very smart operator who successfully adopts the guise of a bumbling idiot. [...] I quite agree with that - various suggestions that 'bumbling Boris' act likely surfaced as a defence mechanism when he went to Eton, because he wasn't anything as posh nor aristocratic as many of his peers. My comment above was really just in frustration that he gets away with it so much, prompted by the numerable public statements he made saying the bus would have an open platform giving the freedom to hop-on and hop-off - well, the mark 2 version won't have that at all, and there are plenty of mark 1 buses plying their trade that never have their rear platforms open. My main issue with the bus though is that it can get so hot. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetroservices
On 14/06/2015 12:28, Recliner wrote: On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 11:40:59 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: [...] I agree Mr Goldsmith, if selected, will be a very tough candidate to beat. I also feel Labour are in grave danger of wrecking their prospects. How so Paul? I suspect Zac would easily beat Dame Tessa or Sadiq Khan. But perhaps Labour will choose dark horse charismatic 'transport expert' Christian Wolmar who has, to my surprise (just) made it on to the shortlist. There's zero chance of Wolmar getting the Labour nomination, really. I like Tessa Jowell a lot, she's a very competent operator, and knows London very well. London as a whole is Labour leaning, and I think Zac Goldsmith might just come across as another Tory posh boy. Of course, there's a lot more to him than that - but he's yet another from the old school gang. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetroservices
On 14/06/2015 11:18, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 08:56:57 +0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: But we have the Boris Bus, Boris Bike, and would-be Boris Island, but no Ken Fare, Ken Train, Ken Card, Ken Tram, etc. I've heard "Kengestion charge" All that proves is that Boris is a bigger egomaniac than Ken was and he was no shrinking violet. Or that "Barclays cycle hire" is too much or a mouthful, and "New Bus for (4?) London or is it New Routemaster?" is too confused. And it's not new; speed limits are here to stay and the Pillbox Affair is now pretty much forgotten, but the ghost of Baron Hore-Belisha still lives on in the form of street furniture. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro ser
In article
rg, (Recliner) wrote: wrote: In article , (Paul Corfield) wrote: On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 12:28:12 +0100, Recliner wrote: On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 11:40:59 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 10:23:54 +0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: Paul Corfield wrote: On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 08:56:57 +0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: But we have the Boris Bus, Boris Bike, and would-be Boris Island, but no Ken Fare, Ken Train, Ken Card, Ken Tram, etc. All that proves is that Boris is a bigger egomaniac than Ken was and he was no shrinking violet. I actually prefer substance to "style" and Ken delivered far more of value and substance. The test of that is that Boris has barely reversed any of Ken's major policy initiatives - especially on transport. All I can give Boris credit for is managing to maintain funding for Crossrail and not cancelling it, South London Line extension to the Overground, sustaining investment in Overground and Tramlink capacity and forcing TfL into releasing Bus Countdown information. There's very little else of merit - the bus network development has lagged behind growth and economic development, the tube is under severe strain and several investments are wrong or have gone wrong, there has been a planning blight of around 6 years which has destoyed momentum in new scheme delivery which will probably result in a gap of 10-12 years in anything substantive happening. Traffic congestion is pretty appalling as is pollution and the Mayor has nothing meaningful to say on this because he essentially believes people can drive where and when they want. Whoever the next Mayor is has some real nasty problems to deal with. It looks like Boris has chosen his successor: fellow old-Etonian Zac, while Boris tries to succeed fellow old-Etonian Dave. Not his choice though is it? It's a party choice and it'll be interesting to see who wins through. Poor old Andew Boff must be seething - is this his third or fourth go at trying to be the candidate? Boris's role was in persuading Zac to stand. If his Richmond constituents back his decision, I think he'd be very likely to win the Tory candidacy, and would then be their best prospect to win the election itself. Didn't know he'd done any persuading. I agree Goldsmith is likely to win provided he has some sort of coherent policy position. I don't trust Greenhalgh at all. TfL would be laid waste in order to fund his proposed fare cuts plus he doesn't understand the need to compenstate the TOCs (outside of TfL control) for revenue losses. I agree Mr Goldsmith, if selected, will be a very tough candidate to beat. I also feel Labour are in grave danger of wrecking their prospects. I suspect Zac would easily beat Dame Tessa or Sadiq Khan. But perhaps Labour will choose dark horse charismatic 'transport expert' Christian Wolmar who has, to my surprise (just) made it on to the shortlist. I can't see the "labour machine" allowing Wolmar to win. I also don't think he's a particularly good candidate. I read his recent Transport document - no mention of buses despite them being the busiest vehicular mode of public transport in London. That's just ridiculous and shows his preoccupation with walking and cycling. As things stand today, and I accept it's very early days, I am not impressed by any candidate from any party. The real yardstick for impression is Boris at this stage 8 years ago and Ken even longer ago. I agree with you on Wolmar. I just don't think he could run the ship. On policing he'd be even more out of his depth than Boris. I've never taken Wolmar seriously as a mayoral candidate. I'm pretty sure both major parties will put up popular London MPs. MPs anyway. I'm amazed Wolmar even managed to creep on to the short list. This campaign to become a candidate must have been hard work for him, and he'll be very out of pocket, both because of the cost of the campaign (presumably not funded by any generous donors) and the absent sales of the next railway history book he won't have written this year. Labour allowed each constituency party to nominate two people. That certainly helped a number of candidates. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover ofSoutheasternMetro services
There is one person who is closely associated with London, but has never uttered the phrases "Boris Bike" or "Boris Bus". That person is Boris Johnson.
|
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
Steve Lewis wrote:
There is one person who is closely associated with London, but has never uttered the phrases "Boris Bike" or "Boris Bus". That person is Boris Johnson. Yes, it's other people who come up with these descriptions, not Boris himself. One does get the impression that he doesn't object to them, though. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetroservices
On 14/06/2015 17:09, Recliner wrote: Steve Lewis wrote: There is one person who is closely associated with London, but has never uttered the phrases "Boris Bike" or "Boris Bus". That person is Boris Johnson. Yes, it's other people who come up with these descriptions, not Boris himself. One does get the impression that he doesn't object to them, though. Of course he doesn't! I wonder whether the value of the new sponsorship for the cycle hire scheme was in any way affected by the knowledge that they're widely referred to as 'Boris Bikes', and not 'Barclays Bikes' as was, or now 'Santander Cycles'. (I vaguely wonder if that was a factor in Barclays pulling their sponsorship - that, and the fact it emanated from the toxic Bob Diamond era of the bank. That said, Barclays are also not renewing their long standing Premier League sponsorship as of 2016, so perhaps it's just a strategic change of direction. Interesting that the new cycle hire sponsor is also a bank though.) |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 13/06/2015 09:48, tim..... wrote: [...] You're ridiculous. Who is the "claimant" of which you speak - the journalist Tom Edwards who wrote the article? In which case, journalism doesn't work like that - you provide summaries. You both seem, to have completely ignored the text that I had issue with It was: "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " (which is still there!) written by the journalist and I asked what "evidence is the to support this claim?". (then you and Paul came in saying he was right, presumably without actually considering what it was he said/I asked) I've watched the (part of the) cast now and there as, as I said, absolutely zero evidence to support this claim If you're referring to Paul C, It wasn't he jumped in to support the journalist without (apparently) actually considering what I had asked. then why on earth should he provide a transcript if you're too distrustful of him and also too lazy to find it yourself. His previous postings clearly show that his analysis has integrity, so he's not just going making something like that up. Also, given two sources corroborate the point - a BBC journalists report and Paul C's summary of the committee hearing - I trust the point. More fool you if you don't. Well, I have seen nothing in the cast to support the view that the objection to the change in the franchise is even linked to the airport (perhaps on the grounds that airport trains would abstract paths) and certainly not that it was done just out of spite. If you have this evidence, please tell me what it is? tim |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of Southeastern Metro services
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 13:54:10 +0100, "tim....." wrote: "Paul Corfield" wrote in message . .. On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 09:48:30 +0100, "tim....." wrote: "Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 11/06/2015 21:10, tim..... wrote: "Paul Corfield" wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33066006 um, just where is the proof of the statement "But not only did it take a dim view, it exacted revenge on the mayor " It just seems to be made up ******** to me Watch the transport committee webcast and listen to what the reps from Kent CC said. I've watched all 2.5 hours of it and I'm very clear about what was said. Tom Edwards of the BBC was at City Hall during the meeting so he may have put a journalistic flourish on what was said but the basic detail is correct. Kent CC objected to the Estuary Airport and refused to agree to the rail devolution proposal. None of that is contested but where the proof of the link? In the 2 1/2 hour webcast of the committee session that Paul has watched/listened to, and you have not... so the claimant should provide a transcript of the relevant bit then expecting someone to watch a 2 and a half hour presentation to accept your point is plain unreasonable. I still think that the link is invented up by someone with a vested interest. I don't believe that elected "officials" would openly admit that they acted out of spite (even if in private, they have)! For goodness sake. You really think I would make it up? No I'm not. I assumed that you quoted someone else's claim I'm actually offended by that. I've no axe to grind given I don't live in South East London and rarely use the trains there. Well I do ... and I don't - because I live in the bit that KCC want to "protect", and ISTM that KCCs view here is entirely sensible. I didn't say it wasn't sensible. They're doing what you'd would expect them to do which is protect the interests of Kent. I'm currently suffering a vastly reduced service because the works at LB have meant that fewer SW locals can run, so in order to protect them, my services have had extra stops inserted. Yes - nothing to do with TfL. Everything to do with DfT and Network Rail. I don't want this reduction in service to be perpetuated because TfL take over responsibility after LB is complete and think "that's what their getting now so we don't need to go back to the previous service, and can use the new paths for our own stations" Let's hope you keep your eyes open for the consultation on the post 2018 franchise specification and you respond appropriately. There's not much to suggest that current service levels and stopping patterns will persist beyond 2018. The only thing that is apparent is that North Kent line services into Cannon Street may be marginally less frequent than prior to the LB works. That's a function of the LB redesign and again a DfT / Network Rail issue and nothing to do with TfL whatsoever. If TfL were to take over the North Kent route trains they'd face the same infrastructure and signalling constraints as any other operator. The only way to ease those is spend a lot more money on the infrastructure either side of LB. Apparently some of it is in poor state and will need attention after 2018 anyway. The transcript of the meeting hasn't been provided yet so I can't point you at it. Now go and tell City Hall's Secretariat that they're a bunch of slackers. Meeting agenda with attendees listed. Mr Balfour from Kent is the person to listen to. http://www.london.gov.uk/moderngov/d...20Services.pdf The webcast is at http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor-assem...embly/webcasts 9th June 2015 Transport Committee is the one to watch / listen to. Fast forward to 1 hour 48 mins for the bit on "red lines" and then keep watching to see the ongoing discussion about what happens when TfL take over a service. 2hrs 10min is the point about Kent's objection to previous plans. Oh so I've still got to listen to 30 minutes :-( No you listen from 2hrs 10 mins in as I said above. It lasts for about 5 minutes if it's such a massive strain on your schedule to find the time. see my reply to Mizter T I won't bother posting relevant stuff here anymore given all the criticism from you. You can all live in ignorance. It wasn't you who posted the original information that I commented upon. You attempted to support it with something that didn't actually do so. I'm sure that people find these links to these committees most interesting, if they are relevant to them, tim |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetroser
On 14/06/2015 15:43, Recliner wrote:
I'm amazed Wolmar even managed to creep on to the short list. This campaign to become a candidate must have been hard work for him, and he'll be very out of pocket, both because of the cost of the campaign (presumably not funded by any generous donors) and the absent sales of the next railway history book he won't have written this year. Someone I know who is into left-wing politics recently mentioned he'd donated to "the trainspotter's" campaign for mayor.. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 2015-06-14 15:10:08 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
I've heard "Kengestion charge" "Kengestion tax", please :) All that proves is that Boris is a bigger egomaniac than Ken was and he was no shrinking violet. Or that "Barclays cycle hire" is too much or a mouthful, and "New Bus for (4?) London or is it New Routemaster?" is too confused. Not to mention that the Spanish armada has sailed in, and so it's now Santander Cycles. It'd perhaps be better if they thought of a catchier generic name for it. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services
On 13/06/2015 14:27, Paul Corfield wrote:
If TfL were to take over the North Kent route trains they'd face the same infrastructure and signalling constraints as any other operator. No no no. If TfL took over then the infrastructure constraints would vanish, and the whole of south London would have Victoria Line-esque frequencies 24/7, with trains which would be brand new every day (not ancient like the 387s), running at Japanese-maglev-test-train-when-the-driver-wants-to-get-home speeds, with a network revised to have the complexity of the Waterloo & City line. And it would be run by nice fluffy nationalised LOROL, not contracted out to evil capitalists or foreign governments. [see every mainstream discussion of the issues ever] -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetroservices
On 14/06/2015 18:32, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2015-06-14 15:10:08 +0000, Arthur Figgis said: I've heard "Kengestion charge" "Kengestion tax", please :) All that proves is that Boris is a bigger egomaniac than Ken was and he was no shrinking violet. Or that "Barclays cycle hire" is too much or a mouthful, and "New Bus for (4?) London or is it New Routemaster?" is too confused. Not to mention that the Spanish armada has sailed in, and so it's now Santander Cycles. It'd perhaps be better if they thought of a catchier generic name for it. The inevitable "New Bikes for London" wouldn't be much better. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetroservices
On 14/06/2015 18:50, Arthur Figgis wrote: On 14/06/2015 18:32, Neil Williams wrote: [...] All that proves is that Boris is a bigger egomaniac than Ken was and he was no shrinking violet. Or that "Barclays cycle hire" is too much or a mouthful, and "New Bus for (4?) London or is it New Routemaster?" is too confused. Not to mention that the Spanish armada has sailed in, and so it's now Santander Cycles. It'd perhaps be better if they thought of a catchier generic name for it. The inevitable "New Bikes for London" wouldn't be much better. Of course if you want to invite sponsorship, you don't think up a catchy generic name - the sponsor wants it to be theirs. |
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:35 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk