London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 12:07 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2004
Posts: 29
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

A think tank comments:

http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355

Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's about time
this notion that London should somehow be artificially divorced from its
south east context is challenged, and this helps do just that. IMO, in
terms of transport and many other matters, the London area should be managed
as an integral part of the south east of England, not separated out into an
artificial region, with the surrounding area divided between two further
administrative regions - east and south east.

Rich





  #2   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 01:19 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Dec 2003
Posts: 829
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

In message , Rich Mallard
writes

http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355

Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's about time
this notion that London should somehow be artificially divorced from its
south east context is challenged, and this helps do just that.


Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast

--
Paul Terry
  #3   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 01:58 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 376
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 13:19:44 +0000 someone who may be Paul Terry
wrote this:-

Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast


That was my initial thought too.

It remains my thought, along with the thought that I should really
not condemn "influential" "think" tanks on the basis of them finally
coming up with what "bad old" BR came up with decades ago.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.
  #4   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 02:07 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
dwb dwb is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2004
Posts: 11
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

Rich Mallard wrote:
A think tank comments:

http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355

Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's
about time this notion that London should somehow be artificially
divorced from its south east context is challenged, and this helps do
just that. IMO, in terms of transport and many other matters, the
London area should be managed as an integral part of the south east
of England, not separated out into an artificial region, with the
surrounding area divided between two further administrative regions -
east and south east.

Rich


Er... aren't TfL suggesting the opposite though? ie they want control of the
main line railways that are in the TfL area.

It's going to an interesting few months as they start their various power
plays on the TOC's to get them to share their revenue etc etc.



  #5   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 03:31 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: May 2004
Posts: 12
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

In uk.railway Paul Terry wrote:

Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast


Damn, I was just about to post that

pete
--
"there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas"


  #6   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 05:29 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,577
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

"Pete Fenelon" wrote in message
...
In uk.railway Paul Terry wrote:

Perhaps it could be called Network SouthEast


Damn, I was just about to post that


Damn, I was just about to post *that*.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes


  #7   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 06:51 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2004
Posts: 70
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

In article ,
"Rich Mallard" wrote:

A think tank comments:

http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355

Interesting stuff, which superficially I like the sound of. It's about time
this notion that London should somehow be artificially divorced from its
south east context is challenged, and this helps do just that.


It's gone down like a lead balloon with the councils in north-west Kent,
south-east Essex, south Hertfordshire, etc.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"The guilty party was the Liberal Democrats and they were hardened offenders,
and coded racism was again in evidence in leaflets distributed in September
1993." - Nigel Copsey, "Contemporary British Fascism", page 62.
  #8   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 07:16 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,577
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

"David Boothroyd" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Rich Mallard" wrote:

A think tank comments:

http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355


It's gone down like a lead balloon with the councils in
north-west Kent, south-east Essex, south Hertfordshire, etc.


Since it would diminish their power, this is unsurprising. But it might not
go down like a lead balloon with the voters of those areas, which is what
really matters.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes


  #9   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 10:49 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 92
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body


"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"David Boothroyd" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Rich Mallard" wrote:

A think tank comments:

http://www.ippr.org.uk/press/index.php?release=355


It's gone down like a lead balloon with the councils in
north-west Kent, south-east Essex, south Hertfordshire, etc.


Since it would diminish their power, this is unsurprising. But it might
not
go down like a lead balloon with the voters of those areas, which is what
really matters.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes


From the point of view of purely 'running a railway', divorced from the
reality of politics, yes the return of NSE may make sense.

However, TfL is the PTE for Greater London, subsidised by the residents of
Greater London and managed by the elected representatives of the residents
of Greater London. TfL as a single body wants to integrate all forms of
transport within Greater London. This provides several benefits for the
people of Greater London (Ticketing, Accountability, similar standards for
all GLA council tax payers whether they are north or south of the river
etc.).

If we, as GLA Council Tax Payers are prepared to pay for good public
transport services, why shouldn't we be able to have some control over
stations and services within our area?

It would be impossible to exert co-ordinated political control over a
Greater South East rail body in the same way as is possible in the GLA.
You would have continual political fighting between the labour suburbs and
Tory shires. And the Tory Shires wouldn't want their Council Taxes raised to
pay a share equal to that paid by GLA residents (when so many people out
there are quite happy with their private vehicles).

The current level of subsidies show that (for the forseeable future) you
cannot run a railway without vast sums of public subsidy. The price to pay
for that is 'political control / public accountability'. And if it's a case
of the railways or local government changing its structure to fit reality,
it's the railways that are going to have to adapt.

Colin



  #10   Report Post  
Old February 16th 05, 11:36 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,796
Default IPPR suggest "Greater South East" rail body

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 22:49:12 -0000, "Colin"
wrote:

It would be impossible to exert co-ordinated political control over a
Greater South East rail body in the same way as is possible in the GLA.
You would have continual political fighting between the labour suburbs and
Tory shires. And the Tory Shires wouldn't want their Council Taxes raised to
pay a share equal to that paid by GLA residents (when so many people out
there are quite happy with their private vehicles).


It's not so much the "Tory Shires" wanting their cars, rather that the
railway in the South East is largely geared up towards getting people
to London, and therefore is irrelevant to most other journeys, which
will either be by bus or more likely by car.

Public transport in Bucks, for example, is appalling outside the
towns, and middling to mediocre within them. If a South East PTE was
to be set up, for want of a better term, it would almost certainly be
London-centric. There would therefore be, from what I can see, an
increase in local tax for little local benefit.

Mind you, bringing back Network SouthEast, so long as it wasn't
accompanied by massive increases in council tax, wouldn't be
particularly unwelcome, and I don't see why it would be incompatible
with TfL taking on revenue risk for local services around London in
the same way as Merseytravel taking on revenue risk[1] for their
sponsored PTE services didn't affect adversely the fact that many of
their services run outside their boundaries.

[1] Which they've now relinquished to SercoNed, as I recall.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
National rail south east - any single engineering works source? Tim Roll-Pickering London Transport 2 April 11th 09 01:50 AM
De Menezes casually picks up a Metro, rushes for a tube then gets killed - photo of body Morton London Transport 8 August 18th 05 11:29 AM
Greater say on trains burkey London Transport 0 March 11th 05 11:52 AM
Park & Ride in Greater London Alan \(in Brussels\) London Transport 1 January 18th 05 12:29 PM
South West Trains over District Line south of East Putney Martin J London Transport 2 February 17th 04 07:40 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017